Two bloggers received home visits from Transportation Security Administration agents Tuesday after they published a new TSA directive that revises screening procedures and puts new restrictions on passengers in the wake of a recent bombing attempt by the so-called underwear bomber.
[...] interrogated two U.S. bloggers [...]served them each with a civil subpoena demanding information on the anonymous source that provided the TSA document.
[The] document, which was not classified, was posted by numerous bloggers. Information from it was also published on some airline websites.
“They’re saying it’s a security document but it was sent to every airport and airline,” says Steven Frischling, one of the bloggers. “It was sent to Islamabad, to Riyadh and to Nigeria. So they’re looking for information about a security document sent to 10,000-plus people internationally. You can’t have a right to expect privacy after that.”
Transportation Security Administration spokeswoman Suzanne Trevino said in a statement that security directives “are not for public disclosure.”
Frischling, a freelance travel writer and photographer in Connecticut who writes a blog for the KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, said the two agents who visited him arrived around 7 p.m. Tuesday, were armed and threatened him with a criminal search warrant if he didn’t provide the name of his source. They also threatened to get him fired from his KLM job and indicated they could get him designated a security risk, which would make it difficult for him to travel and do his job.
“They were indicating there would be significant ramifications if I didn’t cooperate,” said Frischling, who was home alone with his three children when the agents arrived. “It’s not hard to intimidate someone when they’re holding a 3-year-old [child] in their hands. My wife works at night. I go to jail, and my kids are here with nobody.”
Frischling, who described some of the details of the visit on his personal blog, told Threat Level that the two agents drove to his house in Connecticut from DHS offices in Massachusetts and New Jersey and didn’t mention a subpoena until an hour into their visit.
“They came to the door and immediately were asking, ‘Who gave you this document?, Why did you publish the document?’ and ‘I don’t think you know how much trouble you’re in.’ It was very much a hardball tactic,” he says.
When they pulled a subpoena from their briefcase and told him he was legally required to provide the information they requested, he said he needed to contact a lawyer. The agents said they’d sit outside his house until he gave them the information they wanted.
Frischling says he received the document anonymously from someone using a Gmail account and determined, after speaking with an attorney, that he might as well cooperate with the agents since he had little information about the source and there was no federal shield law to protect him.
“We are a free society, knowledge is power and informing the masses allows for public conversation and collective understanding,” Frischling wrote on his blog. “You can agree or disagree, but you need information to know if you want to agree or disagree. My goal is to inform and help people better understand what is happening, as well as allow them to form their own opinions.”
‘State secrets’ and ‘classified documents’.subpoena duces tecum – a writ commanding a person to produce in court certain designated documents or evidence
A government which has an interest to hide so-called ’state secrets’ and ‘classified documents’, a government which uses scare & hardball tactics, a subpoena, and coordinated action that a person will eventually lose its job, is a government you can not trust. Period.
This document was not classified, it was sent to thousands of addresses, and it was published from airlines who wanted to inform their customers who have to expect new security measures, while flying to the USA. It is not really about finding out who is the source from within, for the TSA/Department of Homeland Security/Government. This action was a status en quo exemplum.
The source had a moral, it could come from everywhere within the aviation industry (or the TSA or DOHS). In the eyes of the source, it was justifiable act of righteousness to inform the public about the collective punishment because of the failure of the few. The enactment of new flawed security measures. To provide a piece to the big puzzle. So that the public is ‘[allowed] to form their own opinions’. Publishing this document was in the publics interest. When the source will have his last day, he knows he did something good for the greater public.
Judith Miller, New York Times journalist, who failed to disclose a source spent 85 days in jail. What price tag have whistleblowers, journalistic integrity and transparent democracy and government? When did speaking out and informing the public came with consequences? And there should be no differentiator at all.
All the sudden it seems that brave passengers, bloggers and journalists (who have to be equally treated) end up doing what the Department of Homeland Security’s job is.
- Elliott.org — Full text of my subpoena from the Department of Homeland Security
- Boardingarea.com — The Fallout From SD-1544-09-06 : The Feds At My Door
- Wired — TSA Threatens Blogger Who Posted New Screening Directive
- Shield laws in United States Note: Journalists/Bloggers might not be above the law, but are there to inform the public. Because the above case was in the interest of the public. But who is to judge what is in the interest of the public?! The US Supreme Court has something to do here.
- Journalism versus Yellow Journalism (other source)
- Council of Europe and recent court case from the European Court of Human Rights (PDF). Article19.org and a letter from Nov 09 from article19.org (PDF)
It is our moral duty for our collective future, to stand behind our inalienable rights as citizens, and behind our fellow citizens who are not average. But it becomes evident, that the problems we are facing, can’t be solved just by the few. All the people have to take action. Because everyone has a stake in the future. Every single meter we step back, step back from the problem, is a meter we have lost.
No comments:
Post a Comment