1995-07-15 - Re: Root Causes

Header Data

From: Andrew.Spring@ping.be (Andrew Spring)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: d8cef839a6922789e22b32a1dd4f4eb5e71d6810169ff40c71d267dc1aa7f93b
Message ID: <v01510102ac2d82ae5f36@[193.74.217.19]>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1995-07-15 14:19:00 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 15 Jul 95 07:19:00 PDT

Raw message

From: Andrew.Spring@ping.be (Andrew Spring)
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 95 07:19:00 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Root Causes
Message-ID: <v01510102ac2d82ae5f36@[193.74.217.19]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----


>Is there any precedence or possibility of either filing civil or criminal
>charges against a Government official for their _official_ actions?
>Something that will not only make for some Serious Press, but hit them from
>an unexpected angle?
>

It's extremely difficult to do that and not get laughed out of court.
Think about it.  If the president or congress could be sued for their official
actions, every unemployed auto worker would be suing them for not restricting
Japanese imports.  That's what sovereign immunity is for; to keep the
government from being nibbled to death by millions of little nuisance suits
from soreheads all over the country.

>Alternatively, could a civil suit be filed for invasion of privacy or
>somesuch? Or perhaps the previously mentioned violation of civil rights (a
>la Rodney King)?
>

Well actually, Congress is probably not subject to it's own laws on privacy.
I remember during the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings there was a bit of
a to-do about exactly who it was that leaked Anita Hill's allegations to the
press; and Joe Biden was going around saying "No crimes were committed, no
crimes were committed."  This was explained as Congress-speak for "The leak of
Hill's allegations were done by a Congressman, not a staffer" (It's illegal
for staff member to disclose confidential material, but it's OK for his boss
to do it).

>How many laws, etc, can we invoke? I mean, most congresscritters don't craft
>laws on their own, so the involvement of their staff would constitute
>conspiracy, as well, wouldn't it?
>

First rule of computer self preservation: never try to hack a hacker.  Any
legal harrassment you can do to them, they can do to you.  They're better at
it, and they've got a lot more money than you do.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6ui

iQCVAgUBMAfWao4k1+54BopBAQGjXgP/e6I7dvnOb45EGD4M06KIuKvZu1FqAQFV
Ljt5YFwPrIJuvoiVCZ+u/5d4EGsmCjh3kAUmFY/mJG/9dUj4nFMJFZjssjtuVi3X
hY4I/XFzx6tyTEE0RYOjgZPYx/ruZxegNSBnwMypDAGoYnw2SlExV22hLqVBT3A2
mZLKkHYpm0Q=
=ARI+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
Thank you VERY much!  You'll be getting a Handsome Simulfax Copy of your
OWN words in the mail soon (and My Reply).
<Andrew.Spring@ping.be> PGP Print: 0529 C9AF 613E 9E49  378E 54CD E232 DF96
   Thank you for question, exit left to Funway.







Thread