FBI Ordered to Turn Over Lennon Files 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."
Good news (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Good news (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Good news (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Good news (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Good news (Score:3, Insightful)
When did Stalinism become respectable on Slashdot? (Score:3, Insightful)
This is +4, Informative?
Yeah, and the left never distorts anything? The right should be imprisoned for what their saying?
You're actually talking about IMPRISONING your opponents for their speech and ideals, do you realize that?
Re: (Score:3)
Re:In context. (Score:3)
This election year, people are so polarized that they forget to see that most of America doesn't like being forced into only 2 different camps. A
You're right, (Score:5, Funny)
Re:You're right, (Score:3, Insightful)
The JFK assassination is one case where the public was exposed to lots of information, which is not a problem - the problem is that, in remarkable accordance with Sturgeon's law, 90% of this information was absolute crap.
A majority of americans today believe that there has been some kind of conspiracy around Kennedy's murder. Oliver Stone's film is probably the number 1 culprit for this. The ever helpful BBC made a documentary [bbc.co.uk] which simply blast
Re:Good news (Score:5, Insightful)
From the way copyright law is going, that's going to be about 435 years.
Re:Good news (Score:3, Funny)
What is my incentive to create if my great-great-great-great-great grand children can't sit on their asses living off my royalties? That's the new lazy american dream!
Good news? Bad news (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Good news? Bad news (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Good news? Bad news (Score:2, Informative)
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 (Score:3, Insightful)
the reason? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:the reason? (Score:5, Funny)
That's not why he has a file, it was because John Lennon was a seceret agent for MI6, feeding very unhelpful/false information to American Intellegence departments. This was part of an attempt to stem US world domination by keeping it locked in the cold war and keeping econimy suppressed....
Re:Good news? Bad news (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Good news? Bad news (Score:2)
Just like when the CIA (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Good news? Bad news (Score:5, Insightful)
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 (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Good news (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Good 'n old Security by Obscurity, aka "National Security". It leaves us all with that warm feeling that nothing is going to happen. Unfortunately, it rarely works, as malfeasants usually have other means of gaining access to the
Re:Good news (Score:3, Interesting)
If you were to be sending emails to known 'enemies of the state', do you really think that encryption would stop all kinds of crap landing on you from a very high place? Guilt by association would be enough to condemn you to a miserable future and in some places, maybe, a prematurely terminal future. In fact, the act of hiding the info via encryption i
Re:Good news (Score:4, Interesting)
That email account is pretty much worthless now. Nothing of the kind has EVER happened due to all the USENET posts I have made with a public email address.
There are some some really nasty and hostile elements involved in the threads on this site. It's a serious mistake to reveal an email address if you have any strongly held opinions.
Re:Good news (Score:5, Informative)
But there are many ways to get around that in the latest EO. It won't be released if it will (to quote the EO):
(1) reveal the identity of a confidential human source, or a human intelligence source, or reveal information about the application of an intelligence source or method;
(2) reveal information that would assist in the development or use of weapons of mass destruction;
(3) reveal information that would impair U.S. cryptologic systems or activities;
(4) reveal information that would impair the application of state of the art technology within a U.S. weapon system;
(5) reveal actual U.S. military war plans that remain in effect;
(6) reveal information, including foreign government information, that would seriously and demonstrably impair relations between the United States and a foreign government, or seriously and demonstrably undermine ongoing diplomatic activities of the United States;
(7) reveal information that would clearly and demonstrably impair the current ability of United States Government officials to protect the President, Vice President, and other protectees for whom protection services, in the interest of the national security, are authorized;
(8) reveal information that would seriously and demonstrably impair current national security emergency preparedness plans or reveal current vulnerabilities of systems, installations, infrastructures, or projects relating to the national security; or
(9) violate a statute, treaty, or international agreement.
That determination is made by the agency head (e.g. CIA, NSA), not by an outside panel, and there's no appeal. So it's automatically declassified unless they care enough to stop it.
Re:Good news (Score:2)
I'm not sure exactly how that works or applies here, but you routinely hear about old records from, say, the Nixon administration being made public.
Re:Good news (Score:2)
Re:Good news (Score:3, Interesting)
The government should have a priority of making most of its operations transparent.
Re:Good news (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Good news (Score:4, Interesting)
Yeah (Score:5, Funny)
Imagine!
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
I, for one, am intrigued by the information (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I, for one, am intrigued by the information (Score:5, Funny)
Well we all know that the Beatles were subliminally recruiting for the U.S. military.
And no prizes for guessing who (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:And no prizes for guessing who (Score:3, Interesting)
MI5 are the agency in question, and yes, during that time the UK was very accomodating because of a little thing called the 'Cold War' and the 'European Theatre' that had most of the member states of NATO within a short tank drive of the Warsaw pact.
One of many revelations in the FBI files.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:One of many revelations in the FBI files.... (Score:2)
Beatles? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Beatles? (Score:2)
Re:Beatles? (Score:5, Funny)
It's more like "Let It Be"
When I find myself in times of trouble
The FBI comes to me
Speaking terrorism, let it be...
Finally... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Finally... (Score:2)
" ...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... (Score:2, Informative)
I can see it now. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:I can see it now. (Score:2, Informative)
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 s
Re:I can see it now. (Score:2, Funny)
Were you trying to be funny there, or it it just the irony?
Re:I can see it now. (Score:2)
Say What? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Say What? (Score:2)
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? (Score:2)
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? (Score:3, Funny)
> 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? (Score:5, Interesting)
Sounds just like the current Administration.
Re:Say What? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Say What? (Score:3, Insightful)
WTF? It's not a movement!! If you disagree, you disagree. You don't need to jump on a bandwagon!! You don't have to like people that share your opinion!!
Jeez, I feel like Brian shouting "you are all indivudual!" here...
Re:Say What? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Say What? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Say What? (Score:5, Informative)
This one runs approximately as follows.
1 Charles Manson based his Helter-Skelter massacree scheme on the Beatles song from the White album
2. Sharon Tate gets killed by the Manson family as part of that scheme.
3. Sharon Tate was married to director Roman Polanski.
4. Polanski directed the film 'Rosemary's Baby'.
5. Rosemary's Baby was filmed (in part) in the Dakota Building (The rest was shot in the studio).
6. Lennon lived in the Dakota Building, and was shot just outside it.
7. Supposedly, the first report of Lennon's being shot came from the then current occupants of the appartment where Rosmary's Baby was filmed. (This last claim is the only one in the chain that looks iffy).
It all adds up to a chain of strange coincidences, that don't even point to a particular bunch of conspiritors, or suggest a motive. People have looked to see if the little weasel who killed John Lennon could be tied to the Mansonites, to organized Satanism, or to anything else, and found basically nothing, but that doesn't keep people from trying to put it together into a controversy. It's a fair bet that the FBI files will have nothing that sheds any light on this, and that people will keep looking anyway.
Nothing to do with his murder (Score:2, Informative)
Won't Be Long (Score:5, Interesting)
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 (Score:5, Insightful)
And for anyone who thinks it wont happen (Score:2)
Wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Won't Be Long (Score:5, Insightful)
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 (Score:4, Interesting)
> 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.
Re: Won't Be Long (Score:5, Insightful)
There's nothing that bothers me more about neocons than their contempt for checks and balances on the executive and legislative branches. I miss the days in the 80s when neocons were commonly referred to as "cryptofascists." I'd like to see that term return.
Re:Won't Be Long (Score:5, Funny)
If you believe that was a fully unintended consequence, I own a long suspension bridge north of San Francisco to sell you.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Won't Be Long (Score:3, Interesting)
A good example was the former president of Pakistan being forced out of Office after being filmed by intelligence agents having sex in her own bedroom with her own husband - and not doing anything forbidden by her religeon. The moral failure was seen in allowing herself to be filmed, which she didn't know was happening. Even when you do nothing wrong you can be screwed over by uncontrolled intelligence agencies - so they need some form of che
Confidential: (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Confidential: (Score:5, Funny)
Death, or worse a love of techno, may result.
Exemptions (Score:5, Informative)
Here are the exemptions [rcfp.org]exemptions.
Re:Exemptions (Score:4, Funny)
Are any 'embarrassment'?
When will "they" stop trying to protect us from (Score:3, Insightful)
What I wanna know is... (Score:5, Interesting)
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 (Score:2)
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... (Score:5, Insightful)
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... (Score:2)
Are any of the other people in the files still alive? If so, then it's not really cold, is it?
He he (Score:2, Funny)
someone post a link to the files and receive (Score:5, Funny)
Lots of Data Collected (Score:5, Interesting)
Here's the top secret... (Score:4, Funny)
I've already seen them... (Score:5, Funny)
Is that stuff still around? (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Transparent Government (Score:5, Insightful)
Granted, it is scary to learn 40 years after the fact that the Cuban Missile Crisis almost led to nuclear war. A Russian submarine officer disobeyed a direct order: he did not launch nuclear warhead tipped torpedos at the US fleet.
This came out via the freedom of information act. Yes, it's a little late to learn about it so long after the fact, but it's great to know we should all thank Vasili Arkhipov for stopping the destruction of the world as we know it.
Re:Transparent Government (Score:5, Informative)
Actually he pointed out that the conditions for the SOP change to fire on other combatants were not met to another officer on the submarine. There were no direct orders to fire from the Supreme Soviet, but they do have discretion under certain circumstances, such as hull damage.
Valentin Grigoroevich was the officer that ordered the assembly under stressful circumstances (low air, high temperatures, no communications and constant depth charging from American destroyers enforcing the blockade).
Finally, now we'll know... (Score:3)
Well... (Score:5, Funny)
Found it (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe, just maybe.... STASI (Score:5, Interesting)
Conintelpro? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is why the FOIA is such a good thing. While it's easier to forget about our mistakes, analyzing them helps us avoid repeating them. Its so we can see what the Govt has said about us [fbi.gov].
I quote thus (Score:3, Interesting)
Commissioner Pravin Lal
"U.N. Declaration of Rights"
Lost Lennon/Cat Stevens collaboration (Score:5, Funny)
Delaying tactic (Score:4, Funny)
I got the files! (Score:4, Funny)
Good news folks: the files were released under the Freedom of Information Act. I just got them. Here they are:
Thank God that's all out in the open now.Nothing to see here... (Score:5, Funny)
Imagine the Aural pain that would ensue if these were ever "released".
cLive
Re:crap (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Gee, I wonder WHICH country...? (Score:5, Interesting)
Or possibly Canada. John Lennon spent a good deal of time in Canada doing things he wouldn't so in the US, like his and Yoko's North American bed-in (in Montreal), John and Yoko's "Live Peace in Toronto" concert, and the fact that he stayed with Ronnie Hawkins (IIRC) at a farm here in Ontario for some time.
During those days the RCMP and Canadian police forces were keeping their eyes on rock stars (or at least so it seems to me). In 1977 Keith Richards (Rolling Stones) was arrested for Heroin possession.
I wouldn't be too suprised if the RCMP collected some data on Lennon during his time here. What would suprise me is if the FBI would think that anyone here would care if such information were to be made public 24 years later.
(To be honest though, England does seem to be the more probable source).
Yaz.