I hope he sues
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.
[snip]
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.
Sure, there may be legitimate security concerns but there’s no way to view this as anything other than harassment. More frightening is that this would never have been found out had the author not owned the hosting company.
Via Michael.
March 6th, 2006 at 3:08 pm
Story’s pretty thinly sourced. I kept expecting him to show the letter, but he didn’t. This quote:
and similar items in the story suggest this has to do with national security leaks, not Paul Krugman and Maureen Dowd criticizing Bush. In the case of the NY Times I’d bet it has to do with the story they ran about a secret CIA operation. The story included photos of the planes involved in the operation, complete with the planes’ identifying numbers.
March 6th, 2006 at 3:18 pm
I’d like to see the letter too but I doubt I’d post it if it were me because it could contain private info and may be needed for legal proceedings. Reporters snooping and finding secrets who publishes that info is an age old tradition. Charge them if you like. But getting their personal info seems entirely like harassment to me.
March 6th, 2006 at 9:46 pm
If it’s true, by owning the hosting company he’s covered under fifth amendment protections from self-incrimination.
March 6th, 2006 at 10:01 pm
The fourth amendment doesn’t apply so why should the fifth?
March 6th, 2006 at 10:21 pm
eric blair Says:
“The fourth amendment doesn’t apply so why should the fifth?”
Good point, eric, neither does the 2nd..or the 1st since Campaign Finance Reform. It seems no one questions it when someone “takes the 5th” and refuses to incriminate themselves, but why can’t I “take the 2nd” when I’m exercising my right to armed self-defense in public if I was arrested for “going armed”? Also why can’t we “take the 4th” and be “secure in our papers” when the IRS demands them? And if an organization dares to run an ad mentioning a political candidate 30 days before a Primary or 60 days before a General Election, why can’t they “take the 1st”? when they are prosecuted for a crime by the Federal Government?
ALL of the Bill of Rights for ALL Citizens!!
March 6th, 2006 at 10:31 pm
The Fifth Amendment doesn’t apply unless providing the information would be self-incriminating. Is there any evidence of that?