IT and A National Security Letter Gag Order

fstyke writes "An article in the Washington Post (anonymous for obvious reasons) describes the trauma the president of a small US IT company faces after receiving a National Security Letter. This is sent by the FBI demanding information (140000+ have been sent between 2003/2005 according to the article). Makes for an interesting read of the side effects of receiving such a letter and its requirements for the recipient to remain silent about even the fact he/she has received it.'The letter ordered me to provide sensitive information about one of my clients. There was no indication that a judge had reviewed or approved the letter, and it turned out that none had. The letter came with a gag provision that prohibited me from telling anyone, including my client, that the FBI was seeking this information. Based on the context of the demand -- a context that the FBI still won't let me discuss publicly -- I suspected that the FBI was abusing its power and that the letter sought information to which the FBI was not entitled.'"

Comments

My experience

[adnonsense]

Recently I received CONTENT REMOVED from the --- regarding one of my CONTENT REMOVED. It was delivered personally by two CONTENT REMOVED in a black CONTENT REMOVED and they CONTENT REMOVED terrorist CONTENT REMOVED you're not for us CONTENT REMOVED us.

Under the terms of the CONTENT REMOVED Act it appears I cannot CONTENT REMOVED or CONTENT REMOVED or even badgers. They said they had installed special CONTENT REMOVED on my CONTENT REMOVED connection and would be watching out for transgressions - even something as innocuous as calling G.W. CONTENT REMOVED failure or librarians CONTENT REMOVED CONTENT REMOVED Harry Potter in Syria. Since contacting my la +++NO CARRIER+++

Re:My experience

[clickety6]

Oh, say can [REDACTED] see by the [REDACTED][REDACTED] light
What so [REDACTED] we hailed at the [REDACTED] last gleaming?
Whose [REDACTED]stripes and [REDACTED]stars thru the perilous [REDACTED],
O'er the [REDACTED] [REDACTED] watched were so gallantly [REDACTED]?
And the [REDACTED] red [REDACTED], the [REDACTED] bursting in air,
Gave [REDACTED] through the [REDACTED] that our [REDACTED]was [REDACTED] [REDACTED].
Oh, [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]-[REDACTED] [REDACTED] yet wave
O'er the land of the [REDACTED]and the home of the[REDACTED]?

Re:We one!?????

[theghost]

But "Are current situation," is par for the course? ;)

Rules

[allscan]

The first rule of National Security Letters is you will not talk about...ah you get the point.

Re:yes

[lucabrasi999]

as anything that conflicts with the Constitution in federal code is legally null and void.

PHEW! That makes me feel better. OK. This conversation is over, everyone! It appears that the FBI may have been conflicting with the Constitution and therefore, it's legally null and void.

You can go home now! Nothing to see here!

Re:answering by omission?

[qwijibo]

Only honest people consider it lying. They really have no place in our legal system anyway. =)

Re:In liberal America ..

[Guuge]

What is this Liberal America of which you speak and how do I get there?

Re:This must change

[Rob the Bold]

Given how the US has the largest prison population per capita on the face of the earth

Actually, the US is #2 -- Rwanda is #1.

Reminds me of whenever a US state is 2nd to last in something like education, arts support, % of citizens with their natural teeth, etc., we always say "Thanks, Mississippi".

Thanks, Rwanda.

Re:This must change

[polar red]

Funny ? How the hell could that be funny? It's as serious as cancer.

Re:This must change

[Red Flayer]

Up here in the north, we say "thanks, New Jersey" -- but we're talking about insurance rates, property taxes, traffic congestion, Superfund sites (too polluted to live or work in), college football (wait, scratch that -- for now), odor, gum-chewing "Juicy"-pantsed too-much-makeup hyper-stiffened-mallhair-wearing teenage girls, bad accents, medical waste on the beaches, I could go on. Really, I could, but I'm too proud of my home state's charms to continue.

Re:This must change

[yoyoq]

well, actually one out of 140,000 did violate it or else we would have never heard of it.

Re:answering by omission?

[fizzbin]

"I need to see my attorney. Sorry, but I'm legally obligated not to discuss this with anyone else.

"Not that this has anything to do with why I'm seeing an attorney, but pepople who get those National Security Letters from the FBI can't discuss them with anyone..."

Re:This must change

[EonBlueTooL]

Ron Paul is _NOT_ a republican. Republicans are about bigger government, more spending, and increased debt. This is opposed to democrats who are for bigger government, more spending, and increased taxes.

Not much of a choice between the two is there...

Re:Goldstein?

[hazem]

When do they broadcast the 2 minutes of hate again? I must have missed it this morning.

This is 2007, not 1984. We've upgraded. Instead of just 2 minutes, there's 24 hours of it on Fox News.

Re:This must change

[Archangel Michael]

If there is no god, then there are no "rights" other than what man creates for himself. If he can create it, then he can destroy it, and thus, they aren't "rights".

The idea that rights are "self evident" are also tagged with "endowed by their creator" and thus they are "inalienable". Our ancestors (who fought and died) were much smarter than you think they were, which is why that line is so important in the US Declaration of Independence.

See the problem with Atheists (I assume your one of them), is that they want the benefits of the wisdom of our fathers, without the reason they were so wise. You see, in the US of A, our essential founding doctrine says that certain rights are indeed endowed by our Creator, and that these rights are SELF EVIDENT namely because they are derived from a higher source. If you take away the higher source, you are left holding an empty bag.

But of course the average atheist teacher can't articulate why they have any rights what so ever. Just ask them "why?" they have rights. See if they can actually articulate it without self reference (Circular Logic).