1996-06-12 - Re: [Noise] William Safire on the GAK bastards’ other privacy violations.

Header Data

From: jonathon <grafolog@netcom.com>
To: eric traudt <eric@clever.net>
Message Hash: b2a194c8ab07b1381c72207a7d1c0a7fa9fca87676cdcb803cff5e220539c92c
Message ID: <Pine.3.89.9606120211.A17815-0100000@netcom12>
Reply To: <v02140b00ade2700d75f4@[204.249.244.13]>
UTC Datetime: 1996-06-12 08:48:41 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 16:48:41 +0800

Raw message

From: jonathon <grafolog@netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 16:48:41 +0800
To: eric traudt <eric@clever.net>
Subject: Re: [Noise] William Safire on the GAK bastards' other privacy violations.
In-Reply-To: <v02140b00ade2700d75f4@[204.249.244.13]>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9606120211.A17815-0100000@netcom12>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


	Eric:

On Mon, 10 Jun 1996, eric traudt wrote:

> WASHINGTON (Jun 10, 1996 12:00 p.m. EDT) -- Overlooked in the scandal of
> Travelgate has been the failure of FBI Director Louis Freeh to protect the
> confidential files of citizens from political snoops. Say what you like 
	
> for what lawful purpose? Can any anonymous bureaucrat requisition, 
> rifle through and remove confidential records? How come not one agent 

	I don't have a copy of the law, but it was passed a few years
	ago. << Telecommunications Act of 1994 --- didnt' just allow
	any politicians, to wiretap anybody without a court order,
	but also allowed them to obtain, and retain any records they
	wanted, from any law enforcement body, without any questions. 
	Note just federal, but state, county and local politicians as
	well.  >>

> was required by bureau policy to ask why not even initials appeared on 
> hundreds of requests to check up on Republicans?

	Given the above, I suspect that no signatures are needed.

	





Thread