Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ThirdEye who wrote (209214)	12/12/2001 5:47:15 PM
From: Srexley	Respond to of 769670

"Hence, how would law enforcement know whether there was any actual "message" conveyed to accomplices at all?" I'm going to make an assumption here and we all know what that can make me. But I assume that the instruction manual gives some detailed information on how it would be done, which consequently would give hints, if not specifics on what to look for. This is related to an issue that I gave someone crap for when they said that Ashcroft was just grandstanding by showing the manual. They felt it was just for show, but my guess is that there is some pretty interesting and useful info in there that allows us to learn something about how they operate. We also have people with specialties in breaking codes and stuff, and these are the ones that I invision listening in, not the prosecuters, which will be strictly forbidden. "If the potential for abuse is there, I have virtually no confidence that it will not be exploited sooner or later" That is why studying the issues and asking questions like you pose is important. I would view those as constructive. What I don't like (and I think there is no evidence to support) is the contention that Ashcroft is doing these things to undermine our civil liberties when the over whelming evidence suggests he is doing it to protect us. That said, I beleive the definitions you ask about have been presented and I THINK the safegaurds are in place. Ashcroft did say who could be considered, and how many currently are (16 out of the entire population of incarcerated subjects in America). One fairly big provision is that this is for attorney client privelage for people who are currently in jail. That does not mean they are guilty, but there obviously would be some reason they are in jail. As I have mentioned, both the lawyer and the suspect will be notified that they will be listened to. That fact alone will probably eliminate this form of coded communication for the most part. I'll try to find the particulars on who this could apply to.