Time: Fri Dec 05 02:07:42 1997
	by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id CAA25247
	for <pmitch@smtp-local.primenet.com>; Fri, 5 Dec 1997 02:05:12 -0700 (MST)
	by smtp04.primenet.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id CAA17720;
	Fri, 5 Dec 1997 02:03:11 -0700 (MST)
 via SMTP by smtp04.primenet.com, id smtpd017672; Fri Dec  5 02:02:59 1997
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 1997 02:02:52 -0800
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: "D-Notice" under British Official Secrets Act (fwd)

>In *Above Top Secret* (ISBN:  0-688-09202-0), author Timothy Good
>describes a British government mechanism known as a "D-Notice":
>  A  D-Notice  is  a  formal  letter  of  request  circulated
>  confidentially to newspaper  editors,  warning them that an
>  item of news, which may be protected  under  the  [British]
>  Official   Secrets   Act,   is   regarded  by  the  defense
>  authorities as a  secret  affecting  national security.  It
>  has no legal authority and can only be regarded as a letter
>  of advice or request, but it warns that "whether or not any
>  legal sanction would attach  to  the  act  of  publication,
>  publication  is  considered  to be contrary to the national
>  interest."
>  ...since a D-Notice warns  an  editor that publication of a
>  given news item may violate the [Official Secrets] Act, the
>  effect is similar to censorship.
>Does  the United States have some sort of similar mechanism?  Has
>the  U.S.  government  ever  contacted  prominent  news  outlets,
>suggesting that pursuit  of  a  particular  story could adversely
>affect national security?  At least one instance comes  to  mind:
>ABC  News  had reportedly been set to air a story on how the U.S.
>government seems to  have  had  prior  knowledge  that the Murrah
>Building in Oklahoma City was about to be bombed.  The story  was
>pulled  at  the  last minute, however, reportedly due to concerns
>that its airing might  greatly  weaken  and  even topple the U.S.
>In "The Secret Report and  the  Death Warrant" (CN 9.02), Sherman
>H. Skolnick describes how the late Vincent  Foster  was  employed
>for  years  by  the  National Security Agency (NSA), and may have
>been doing some "freelance" work on the side:
>  The report goes  on  to  show  that  since the early 1980s,
>  Foster  held  the  equivalent rank of Military General with
>  the   super-secret   satellite   spying  and  code-cracking
>  operation of the U.S., the National Security Agency  [NSA].
>  Foster  continued  this  work for the few months before his
>  death  in  the  Clinton  White  House.  Travelling for NSA,
>  hundreds of thousands of miles, Foster was the  master-mind
>  of an NSA Project that tracked wire transfers between banks
>  worldwide -- trillions of  dollars  per  day, of banks both
>  friend  and  foe.   Because   of   being  on  top  of  this
>  enterprise,  Foster  never  believed  that  project   might
>  someday find his  purported  foreign  secret coded accounts
>  that  could  finger him as having violated various American
>  espionage laws.
>Skolnick's allegations are  corroborated  in  a classic series of
>reports by J. Orlin Grabbe, "Allegations Regarding Vince  Foster,
>the NSA, and Banking  Transactions  Spying."  [1] Further support
>for claims that Vince Foster  was  a  high-ranking  NSA  official
>appear  in a story in the May 15, 1996 Washington Times newspaper
>("Spy  Agency  Holds  Large  File  On  Foster,"  by  Bill Gertz.)
>Referring to revelations contained in the April 24, 1996 issue of
>Strategic Investment newsletter,  the  Washington  Times  article
>reports  that  "secret  documents  held  by the electronic spying
>agency [NSA] indicate Mr. Foster's  death was a matter of 'highly
>sensitive national security.'"
>There's that word:  "national security."  Was  Foster's  death  a
>"national  security"  matter and, for that reason, were prominent
>news outlets in the  U.S.  given  some version of the "D-Notice?"
>That would explain why most mainstream journalists here have been
>so  remarkably  blind   regarding   inconsistencies   surrounding
>Foster's  supposed "suicide."  Furthermore, given that Foster was
>a high-ranking NSA employee and had apparently violated his trust
>by engaging  in  espionage,  it  ought  to  be considered whether
>Foster had been secretly sentenced  to  death  by  some  sort  of
>secret  tribunal.   A  clue  to  this possibility is found in Dr.
>Stanton    Friedman's    book,    *Top    Secret/Majic*    (ISBN:
>1-56924-741-2).   Friedman  writes  about  mere  =civilians=  and
>the  possible  extreme  penalty  they   can  be  subject  to  for
>violations of "national security":
>  Civilians  unfortunate  enough  to  be  caught  up  in  the
>  security web were made to sign  silence  agreements  ending
>  with  the  phrase  "upon  penalty  of death" according to a
>  witness who very  quietly  spoke  to  me  about  it after a
>  lecture.
>If a civilian can potentially  be  secretly  found  "guilty"  and
>sentenced  to  death,  then  the same fate could definitely await
>high-ranking NSA officials who violate  their trust and engage in
>But why, if Foster had been secretly sentenced to death, was  the
>sentence  executed  so  sloppily?   Surely  NSA could have done a
>neater job of terminating the  errant Foster.  Widely reported as
>a deep-level cohort of Foster was Hillary Rodham Clinton.  If Ms.
>Clinton had been involved in Foster's alleged espionage,  then  a
>poorly executed termination of Foster might have been designed to
>embarrass  the  First  Lady,  weaken  her  influence, and thereby
>incidentally punish her as well.
>--------------------------<< Notes >>----------------------------

Paul Andrew Mitchell, Sui Juris      : Counselor at Law, federal witness 01
B.A.: Political Science, UCLA;   M.S.: Public Administration, U.C.Irvine 02
tel:     (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night 03
email:   [address in tool bar]       : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU 04
website: http://supremelaw.com       : visit the Supreme Law Library now 05
ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech,  at its best 06
             Tucson, Arizona state   : state zone,  not the federal zone 07
             Postal Zone 85719/tdc   : USPS delays first class  w/o this 08
_____________________________________: Law is authority in written words 09
As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice.  We shall 10
not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal. 11
======================================================================== 12
[This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.] 13


Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail