[117064] in Cypherpunks
Re: Official Phrasing to force disclosure of sentry operations?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Greg Broiles)
Wed Aug 25 20:16:11 1999
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 16:54:13 -0700
From: Greg Broiles <gbroiles@netbox.com>
To: "Wilfred L. Guerin" <Wilfred@Cryogen.com>
Cc: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Message-ID: <19990825165413.A28904@ideath.parrhesia.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <37C47551.F1319F0F@Cryogen.com>; from Wilfred L. Guerin on Wed, Aug 25, 1999 at 06:59:29PM -0400
Reply-To: Greg Broiles <gbroiles@netbox.com>
On Wed, Aug 25, 1999 at 06:59:29PM -0400, Wilfred L. Guerin wrote:
>
> Can someone please direct us to any new information regarding the
> official phrasing needed to force disclosure of operations or
> "informance", and please also post sources of the older questions and
> legal logistics for those of us who have since lost the documents...
As far as I know, you're chasing an urban legend.
> An obvious example of this is the older scripts used by the amerikan cia
> when asked a certain string of questions, the operatives would be forced
> legally to either state immediately or prepare a formal statement
> regarding their activities within a certain time frame (if they have no
> clearance to avoid it from their leaders/heirchy).
Do you have a cite for this?
--
Greg Broiles
gbroiles@netbox.com
