kdonow@labrea.stanford.edu (01/14/91)
What are you trying to prove here? The book was not/is not banned in the US. Unless you have concrete knowledge to the contrary, you have an obligation to be very careful with this kind of claim, and the point made in Randall's letter. As you well know, fiber cuts are common business and the account given by the teleco fits the facts of the disruption as they were experienced by the people in the area. Or maybe it was all a joke? Ken Donow [Moderator's Note: Well first of all, I did not say the CIA cut the cable. I printed a message from someone who 'heard it second hand that the cut was a terrorist act ...' Since his source was 'someone' in the CIA I noted that the agency has been in the past accused of doing things and then blaming (the covert, destructive acts) on 'black radicals' or whoever we are supposed to hate at that time. Regards the book, it was written and ready for publication. The CIA went to court to block publication. The court upheld the CIA. It was appealed to a higher court and the decision was to have the CIA approve what could or could not be printed. The edition of the book circulating in the USA has many empty pages and entire paragraphs left blank by the authors deliberatly to show the extent of what they were forbidden to write about. Interestingly enough, the *European version* of the same book is 100 percent intact. So pick some word other than 'banned' which you think is more appropriate. PAT]