Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

FBI Ordered to Turn Over Lennon Files

CowboyNeal posted about 10 years ago | from the helter-skelter dept.

Privacy 396

CatDogLordOfTheRoot writes "CNN is reporting that a U.S. District Judge rejected the governments arguements to keep the secret records of John Lennon sealed. The FBI argued that releasing the last ten pages would pose a risk to national security as a foreign government (not identified) secretly gave information to the US Government. Looks like another big step in the Freedom of Information Act."

cancel ×

396 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

LOL (0, Troll)

Luke727 (547923) | about 10 years ago | (#10400804)

Jews killed Lennon. LOL!

Re:LOL (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400868)

before or after they did 9/11?

Re:LOL (0, Offtopic)

empaler (130732) | about 10 years ago | (#10400928)

You killed my excellent mood. Twit.

frist psot?? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400805)

tittyfuck

Good news (4, Interesting)

PrvtBurrito (557287) | about 10 years ago | (#10400810)

There should be a law making all records public after a certain period of time (like copyright expiration). (fp?)

Re:Good news (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400818)

> (fp?)

You fail it

Re:Good news (5, Funny)

BlackEyedSceva (798150) | about 10 years ago | (#10400819)

Most of the time information becomes public anyway. There is no need for a LAW to do this.

Re:Good news (4, Interesting)

PrvtBurrito (557287) | about 10 years ago | (#10400848)

Not true. Piles of secret information is buried constantly. Of course, there is public info, but there is very little civil war, mexican-american war or wwi info that is available.

Re:Good news (2, Funny)

DAldredge (2353) | about 10 years ago | (#10400854)

Yes there is. Our goverment should not keep secrets from the public any longer than necessary. Except for the case of REAL national security matters, and the penalty for classifying something too high should be 1-5 years in prison per page.

You're right, (5, Funny)

empaler (130732) | about 10 years ago | (#10400867)

I'm reading up on the FBI files on the JFK assassination atm... oh, wait.

Re:Good news (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400837)

There should be a law making all records public after a certain period of time (like copyright expiration).

Uh, the way things are going, the sun will expire first.

Re:Good news (5, Insightful)

The-Bus (138060) | about 10 years ago | (#10400843)

"after a certain period of time (like copyright expiration"

From the way copyright law is going, that's going to be about 435 years.

Good news? Bad news (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400891)

Wow, I can't believe people are so selfish that they'd risk the U.S.'s relations with another country just so they, and _possibly_ others, can see what happened. If the FBI wants documents classified, the FBI has a good reason. I don't want another 9/11 in the U.S. or a foreign country just because people want to see some documents.

Re:Good news? Bad news (5, Insightful)

wHartHog(69) (256066) | about 10 years ago | (#10400934)

You've got to be kidding. The whole reason we have these problems is because of secrecy. We must hold our government accountable for its actions. The only way to ensure that is to know what, when, where, why, and how it takes action. There is no "them" and "us". The government is an extention of "the people", and should act on our behalf. We must ensure that it does. Freedom requires dilegence. And action

Re:Good news? Bad news (1)

momerath2003 (606823) | about 10 years ago | (#10400948)

I believe YHBT.

Re:Good news? Bad news (1)

wHartHog(69) (256066) | about 10 years ago | (#10400971)

Quite possible. Trolls better watch out though - I have bigger teeth.

Re:Good news? Bad news (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400965)

What slashdotters don't get is that the government isn't out to get us. Yes, it may be fun to think up conspiracy theories so that our drab lives feel better, but the truth of the matter is that what's classified is classified _for a reason_. Many of the people working for the government are some of the most moral people in the country. We need a balance of freedom and security to survive and strive as a country. Unbalancing one for the other because of interest or paranoia is not a good idea. These issues are real, and should be treated as real.

Re:Good news? Bad news (1)

wHartHog(69) (256066) | about 10 years ago | (#10401037)

People are: a) basically good b) basically bad c) basically neutral There is no way to be certain without taking a measurement is there? Everything else is conjecture and opinion. And how do you make take the measurement? Observation. Read this page for a few quotes from people who had experience:
http://en.thinkexist.com/quotation/The_price_of_fr eedom_is_eternal_vigilance/12143.html [thinkexist.com]

Re:Good news? Bad news (2, Informative)

empaler (130732) | about 10 years ago | (#10401006)

Freedom requires dilegence. And action

Some dead guy [brainyquote.com] once said something similar, to some extent:

The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either.

Re:Good news? Bad news (1)

TibbonZero (571809) | about 10 years ago | (#10400966)

So speakth the AC...

Just like when the CIA (2, Insightful)

empaler (130732) | about 10 years ago | (#10400974)

had good reasons not to disclose information on how they managed the drug cartels in South America. Yeah, that was in public interest.

Re:Good news? Bad news (5, Insightful)

einhverfr (238914) | about 10 years ago | (#10400994)

Wow, I can't believe people are so selfish that they'd risk the U.S.'s relations with another country just so they, and _possibly_ others, can see what happened. If the FBI wants documents classified, the FBI has a good reason. I don't want another 9/11 in the U.S. or a foreign country just because people want to see some documents.

Right, and by that logic, let's just suspend Habeus because it might make us safer too....

No, judicial and legal principles, and the framework of liberty is more important than any single action that the government does purportedly in the interest of the people. Otherwise we lose *all* our liberty.

Re:Good news (5, Insightful)

NakedGoat (816941) | about 10 years ago | (#10400937)

There are in fact declassification procedures for all U.S. classified documents that state specific declassification timeframes. The declassification time is specified for the specific document or information. 50 years is very common.
The government often has very legitimate reasons for keeping documents under wraps. For instance if Yoko Ono were passing information from North Korea with the knowledge of the local government China may not look favorably upon it and it could cause more than a little tension.

Yeah (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400815)

Looks like another big step in the Freedom of Information Act

Imagine!

I, for one, am intrigued by the information (5, Funny)

Chairboy (88841) | about 10 years ago | (#10400816)

I look forward to reading the released documents. I believe a 'Sargeant Pepper' may be the foreign national in question, and I think it's high time he produce answers.

In Soviet Russia (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400817)

In Soviet Russia, we secretly give information about hippie singers TO YOU!!!

And no prizes for guessing who (2, Interesting)

ewe2 (47163) | about 10 years ago | (#10400820)

because my bet is on the British government who were so obliging. I imagine Special Branch were leaping at the chance.

Huh? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400821)

This is great news but why is it posted here? It has nothing to do with technology.

One of many revelations in the FBI files.... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400822)

the walrus was Paul.

Re:One of many revelations in the FBI files.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400831)

Goo goo g'joob.

Re:One of many revelations in the FBI files.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400859)

Oompa oompa everybody oompa.

Re:One of many revelations in the FBI files.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400869)

The larch

Re:One of many revelations in the FBI files.... (1)

jerkychew (80913) | about 10 years ago | (#10401015)

But he's dead!

Beatles? (4, Funny)

BenSpinSpace (683543) | about 10 years ago | (#10400826)

Hey Judge Don't let me down Take a security threat And make it better Remember, for all the harm that you do Screw the FBI, and be a trendsetter

Re:Beatles? (1)

grolschie (610666) | about 10 years ago | (#10400886)

Bah bah bah ba-ba-ba-bah, ba-ba-ba-bah, Hey Judge!

Moderators on vinegar? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400903)

Off-topic? Moderators must be on vinegar!

Re:Moderators on vinegar? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400960)

Nah, the moderator was 12 and has never heard a beatles song.

GB (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400827)

FUCK GEORGE BUSH!

crap (0, Offtopic)

just_von (791649) | about 10 years ago | (#10400828)

Now we'll never know where he got all those good drugs from.

Re:crap (3, Insightful)

just_von (791649) | about 10 years ago | (#10400852)

restate that: Now we'll know where he got all those good drugs from!!

Finally... (3, Insightful)

Lu Xun (615093) | about 10 years ago | (#10400829)

...we'll learn what that last song on the White Album means.

Re:Finally... (1)

suckmysav (763172) | about 10 years ago | (#10400856)

" ...we'll learn what that last song on the White Album means."

What has Paul McCartney signing goodnight to his kids got to do with the John Lennon files?

Re:Finally... (1)

essence (812715) | about 10 years ago | (#10400946)

What has Paul McCartney signing goodnight to his kids got to do with the John Lennon files?

...ahh, that was Ringo singing.

It's Ringo not Paul (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400991)

It's Ringo, not Paul singing 'Goodnight'.

Re:Finally... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400924)

Perhaps you mean the next to last song on the white album.

I can see it now. (4, Funny)

Artie_Effim (700781) | about 10 years ago | (#10400830)

Yoko, instead of being a super-royal-bitch who is single handedly responsiable for breaking up the greatest band of that era, was in fact a defected spy master, living in annomity amounget the illuminati.

Re:I can see it now. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400853)

Just like the chick on "This is Spinaltap"!

Re:I can see it now. (2, Informative)

rco3 (198978) | about 10 years ago | (#10400938)

1) Greatest band ever. Sadly, White Zombie didn't make the final cut.
2) responsible.
3) anonymity.
3) amongst
Sorry to be such a pedant. One or two errors, I could overlook. Four became too egregious to ignore. After that, I kinda stopped counting...

On the bright side, you spelled the plural of Illuminatus correctly. However, you forgot to capitalize it. Technically, you shouldn't have hyphenated super-royal-bitch the second time; super-royal bitch would have been correct. You should have hyphenated single-handedly, though. Oh, and unless there's a lot more about Yoko we don't know, she is more likely a defected spy mistress.

No offense, I hope. :-)

Re:I can see it now. (2, Funny)

Pfhorrest (545131) | about 10 years ago | (#10401005)


1) Greatest band ever. Sadly, White Zombie didn't make the final cut.
2) responsible.
3) anonymity.
3) amongst
Sorry to be such a pedant. One or two errors, I could overlook. Four became too egregious to ignore. After that, I kinda stopped counting...

Were you trying to be funny there, or it it just the irony?

Re:I can see it now. (1)

empaler (130732) | about 10 years ago | (#10401023)

I mostly gave up years ago and just started skipping those posts... ;p /another language nazi

Re:I can see it now. (1)

fatmonkeyboy (257833) | about 10 years ago | (#10401059)

Maybe he used to get mad at his school, the teachers that taught him weren't cool?

Obligatory (0, Redundant)

grolschie (610666) | about 10 years ago | (#10400832)

Information wants to be free! ;-)

Re:Obligatory (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400875)

Your sig reminds me: I turned Willing To Meta Moderate off since I have not had mod points in over a year. I'm a subscriber and I have no idea why I lost the ability to be a moderator, but a quick look at my comment history will show that I have a single solitary troll to my name (it was a bad day).

I figure if they can't forgive some imagined transgression, I'm not wasting my time with the meta half of it.

Re:Obligatory (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400877)

Calories. Freedom. Work.

Re:Obligatory (1)

ESqVIP (782999) | about 10 years ago | (#10400902)

So Let it Be!

Or... (-1, Troll)

wicka_wicka (679279) | about 10 years ago | (#10400838)

We could just keep secret. It's not hurting anyone not knowing what's in these documents...all it COULD do is hurt national security, if the FBI is serious.

Say What? (4, Insightful)

AsnFkr (545033) | about 10 years ago | (#10400842)

Am I the only one that was unaware there was any sort of scandal or cover up or anything fishy about his death? I thought it was a pretty straightforward murder. This is indeed curious information.

Re:Say What? (1)

tute666 (688551) | about 10 years ago | (#10400925)

Yup, i assumed it was just a crazy fangirl (redundancy?)

Re:Say What? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400955)

And all along I thought Mark David Chapman was a guy. I guess it explains a lot if he was really just an ugly chick with a guys name.

Re:Say What? (1)

tukkayoot (528280) | about 10 years ago | (#10400941)

I've never heard about any hidden files or anything either. But it figures, conspiracy theorists are always suspicious of "lone nut" assassins, aren't they?

Of course the article doesn't say the files had anything directly to do with the assassination, so it could just be a straightforward murder, and the files probably relate to something else?

Re:Say What? (1)

sumdumass (711423) | about 10 years ago | (#10400985)

I was under the impression that the FBI kept files on the b eatles because they were foreingers and thier music was not only popular but going against the grain.

In other words, they did it to do it. Reletivly recently the FBI has released some of the files they kept but i guess they were not complete. I never got into them more then listening to thier music a couple of times.

Re: Say What? (3, Funny)

Black Parrot (19622) | about 10 years ago | (#10401047)


> I never got into them more then listening to thier music a couple of times.

I presume that disclaimer was for the FBI's benefit...

Re:Say What? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400973)

I think there was something about a grassy knoll and more shooters. Damn those grassy knolls!

Re:Say What? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400978)

This had nothing to do with his death. The FBI followed John Lennon because he had his own opinion of the war in Vietnam. So President Nixon had the FBI treat him like a national security risk.

Sounds just like the current Administration.

Re:Say What? (4, Informative)

ggvaidya (747058) | about 10 years ago | (#10401040)

It's not about his death (which was pretty straightforward, yeah). In the early 1970s, the FBI were investigating Lennon and other rock-n-rollers with political interests. You can get more information here [lennonfbifiles.com] and here [beatlesagain.com] .

Re:Say What? (4, Informative)

iamdrscience (541136) | about 10 years ago | (#10401045)

The files in question are the files the FBI kept on Lennon while he was alive. He was watched by the FBI because of his antiwar stance and he was not a U.S. citizen. There is no controversy about his death.

Nothing to do with his murder (2, Informative)

Average_Joe_Sixpack (534373) | about 10 years ago | (#10401046)

Lennon was an outspoken member of the anti-war movement. He had planned several protests for the 72 GOP convention as well as a nationwide tour to register young voters for the McGovern campaign who was an anti-Vietnam war candidate. Nixon had the FBI trail Lennon and tried to build a case to have him deported. The FBI had gone as far as tapping his phone to try and get evidence of any criminal activity. They focused on any donations to Left-wing "terrorist" groups and any narcotic evidence.

Won't Be Long (5, Interesting)

geomon (78680) | about 10 years ago | (#10400860)

And you will have to fight for the information that US security and intelligence agencies have accumulated on you.

The problem with the USA Patriot Act is that it has an unintended consequence: While working under the guise of gathering information on terrorists (a good thing) a great deal more information is gathered on innocent individuals (a bad thing).

Now before people start waving their arms around with "You've got nothing to worry about unless you've got something to hide", keep in mind that information can always be used for purposes other than stopping terrorism. Information can be used for political reasons as well.

That is the problem with the USA Patriot Act. You will never know what information has been gathered on you, and you will never know if some *legal* activity, such as belonging to a political organization, will become a problem for you or your family in the future.

Lennon may not have been right, he may have created political problems for the Nixon Administration, but he did everything in the open and legally.

Look where it got him.

Are you now (5, Insightful)

empaler (130732) | about 10 years ago | (#10400907)

or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?

And for anyone who thinks it wont happen (1)

Unknown Poltroon (31628) | about 10 years ago | (#10400910)

REmember all those files that they found in the whitehouse under clinton?

Wrong. (5, Insightful)

DAldredge (2353) | about 10 years ago | (#10400912)

They are not unintended consequences, they are deliberate. It will make it easier for those in power to stay in power and help keep 'undesirables' out of power.

Re:Won't Be Long (4, Insightful)

tm2b (42473) | about 10 years ago | (#10401035)

The problem with the USA Patriot Act is that it has an unintended consequence: While working under the guise of gathering information on terrorists (a good thing) a great deal more information is gathered on innocent individuals (a bad thing).
Jim Pinkerton, a FOX News (bear with me, he's one of the ones who does more than repeat the RNC talking points) commentator, makes an excellent point against the Patriot Act that conservatives would be wise to attend.

When they read the Patriot Act, they imagine it being used against people that this administration deems as enemies. They are comfortable with this: they see it as to be used against terrorists, illegal immigrants and other potential dangers.

Pinkerton makes the point that they must now picture the same powers in the hand of an administration that they would not be some comfortable with: for example, in the hands of a liberal President, let's say for the sake of argument a President Hillary Clinton.

Most neocons should think long and hard about that kind of mix, and why the United States has the strong tradition of limiting the power of the executive and subjecting everything to the possibility of judicial review. They're not there to protect the terrorists, they're there to protect us against an administration with whom we do not agree.

Re: Won't Be Long (3, Interesting)

Black Parrot (19622) | about 10 years ago | (#10401062)


> and why the United States has the strong tradition of limiting the power of the executive and subjecting everything to the possibility of judicial review.

And unfortunately, we also have a strong tradition of spying on people who don't do what the powers that be want them to do. A few years back news came out that that the FBI had a 70 page file on a former president of the University of California, simply because he wouldn't fire a couple of professors that certain people thought were too liberal.

Confidential: (4, Funny)

Sophrosyne (630428) | about 10 years ago | (#10400862)

Yoko Ono is really an alien... do not look her directly in the eyes.

Re:Confidential: (5, Funny)

DAldredge (2353) | about 10 years ago | (#10400919)

Screw that! Do NOT under any circumstance listen to the Audio Weapon she calls 'singings'.

Death, or worse a love of techno, may result.

Re:Confidential: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400962)

Fourteen years. Files. That bit about, Yoko.
Life-size statuary. Seen in malls. Train stations.
Along the boardwalk. Creepers. Yoko.
Before. Sentient. Now. Stone. Gulp. Yoko.

Exemptions (5, Informative)

acceber (777067) | about 10 years ago | (#10400864)

The FOI Act applies explicitly to government agencies, such as the FBI. The FBI challenged the act because they felt that the information was a threat to national security. There are nine exemptions to the FOI Act in which an agency can refuse to disclose information.

Here are the exemptions [rcfp.org] exemptions.

When will "they" stop trying to protect us from (2, Insightful)

Bob Bitchen (147646) | about 10 years ago | (#10400906)

the truth? Haven't we matured enough as a civilization to be able to handle the truth? It's as if "they" think we're all scared sheep that will fly into a panic at even the hint of "bad" news. We have come a long way and deserve the truth. Plus it's just not fair that "they" get to know all the juicy details.

Re:When will "they" stop trying to protect us from (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400921)

Grab your tinfoil hat and read this. [slashdot.org]

Great sig (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10400939)

--
http://64.21.238.149/cgi-bin/view.cgi?20040929 0745 28342711000000&id=58

Sure do hate when people uses anchor tags with URLs around text that actually explains what the fuck they're trying to point at.

What I wanna know is... (5, Interesting)

NeuroManson (214835) | about 10 years ago | (#10400909)

Why oh WHY are records sealed regarding, in essense, a celebrity civilian who's been dead for almost 24 years now?

I mean I had my own conspiracy theory that it was due to the Reagan administration taking office, or a Manchurian Candidate situation, but hasn't the FBI figured out that hiding documents on cold cases long out of date only adds to the suspicion?

Come on, it's in the bloody summary (2)

empaler (130732) | about 10 years ago | (#10400953)

'National Security', 'foreign intelligence'.

If the US had gotten intel from UK on French citizens, scandal would ensue if the frenchies found out. UK would not be happy to have incident repeated, thus would not share as much intel.

Re:What I wanna know is... (4, Insightful)

CosmeticLobotamy (155360) | about 10 years ago | (#10401024)

hasn't the FBI figured out that hiding documents on cold cases long out of date only adds to the suspicion?

The FBI knows what it's doing. If you only fight when you have something to hide, everyone will know you have something to hide when you're fighting. Every time there's a controversy made about it and it turns out to be nothing, people get less suspicious.

That, and they just don't like to have we mortals looking over their shoulders. It's a penis thing.

Re:What I wanna know is... (1)

Xaoswolf (524554) | about 10 years ago | (#10401061)

if only lennon is dead, is it really a cold case?

Are any of the other people in the files still alive? If so, then it's not really cold, is it?

He he (2, Funny)

Basehart (633304) | about 10 years ago | (#10400927)

All I know is that you cannot lead if you send mexxed missages.

someone post a link to the files and receive (5, Funny)

Savatte (111615) | about 10 years ago | (#10400931)

Instant Karma

Re:someone post a link to the files and receive (1)

Mskpath3 (764785) | about 10 years ago | (#10400951)

Oh come now. Won't someone give this fellow some well deserved points?

Lots of Data Collected (5, Interesting)

BisonHoof (810891) | about 10 years ago | (#10400963)

It is certainly true that the FBI were *very* interested in Lennon, especially during his "Marxist" phase, circa "Some Time in New York City". According to John Wiener ("Lennon vs the FBI" in Thomson and Gutman's "Lennon Companion") there is a 288 page file on Lennon in the FBIs "domestic security" section, of which 199 pages are still classfied "in the interests of defence of foregin policy", and thousands of pages in the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

Re:Lots of Data Collected (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10401021)

"Are" "you" "sure" "about" "that" "?"

Who Really Cares? (-1, Flamebait)

rts008 (812749) | about 10 years ago | (#10400967)

WTF-some mediocre musician gets shot... WHO F'NG CARES!

I Care (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10401032)

A mountain road. Tennessee.
" Wait. What did the radio, just..is this a joke ? "
A university. Thirty-thousand mediocre students.
" This campus will be closed. " Two days.

Mediocrity. Ignorance. And me.
Strength. Pride. Intelligence. Manners. You.

Here's the top secret... (4, Funny)

simetra (155655) | about 10 years ago | (#10400987)

The Walrus Was Paul.

I've already seen them... (4, Funny)

jcostantino (585892) | about 10 years ago | (#10400999)

Saw them already, Greedo shot first.

Is that stuff still around? (3, Insightful)

NotQuiteReal (608241) | about 10 years ago | (#10401003)

No, I didn't RTFA, but it has been almost 25 years since he was killed. Why would anyone keep stuff that long - doesn't the FBI have a shread-on date?

Maybe that is what is driving it - release it or lose it? I dunno.

Then again, folks are still obsessed with Elvis and Marilyn Monroe. Go figure.

Leaked documents on the net (1, Redundant)

Beatlebum (213957) | about 10 years ago | (#10401010)

A leaked FBI document confirmed that the walrus was indeed Paul.

Finally, now we'll know... (2)

The I Shing (700142) | about 10 years ago | (#10401025)

Once these documents are released, we'll actually know how many holes it takes to fill the Albert Hall.

Well... (4, Funny)

iamdrscience (541136) | about 10 years ago | (#10401027)

a U.S. District Judge rejected the governments arguements to keep the secret records of John Lennon sealed.
Well, I for one, am looking forward to hearing a new John Lennon album because honestly, Imagine and the Wedding Album are getting a little stale. Still though, I understand the FBI wanting to keep it sealed, I mean, imagine the resale value of something like that, it has to be like 5 times a butcher cover of Yesterday and Today.

A deliberate cover 'issue' to avoid real ones. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10401028)

Like the recent hailing of some of the patriot act not passing. Hello, that means some of it did.

So were they right? (0, Flamebait)

anthony_dipierro (543308) | about 10 years ago | (#10401031)

The FBI argued that releasing the last ten pages would pose a risk to national security as a foreign government (not identified) secretly gave information to the US Government. Looks like another big step in the Freedom of Information Act.

Hopefully not a big step backward in national security, though.

Found it (4, Funny)

Sloppy (14984) | about 10 years ago | (#10401056)

Turns out FBI was using an old version of wu-ftp server. I got in and found what this is all about. It is indeed a threat to national security. Here's an exerpt:
Imagine there's no countries,

It isn't hard to do
If there are no countries, there's no USA. There is also some evidence of a communist plot that Lennon was involved with, which would have us all with no possessions, "sharing" all the world. Defeating the Soviets came at a prodigious price. We can't afford to let this plot reactivate or we'll have to fight it all over again.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?