Amusing, Aimee -- or is it "Amusing Aimee"? But the real discussion was about protected speech, was it not? You previously posted a piece on "842" as if that were an actual statute forbidding the "teaching" of info on explosives and bombs. Where is that law, actually? This case is about someone selling pipe bombs, something totally different in the first place -- but protected activity under the 2nd, nonetheless. And yes, we are aware that undercover LEO's often act as agent provocateur. So what's your point? We also know, from the Judy Barri case that LEO's (FBI in this case) even teach bomb making them selves, and, quite possibly, even plant bombs in the cars of citizens they have under surveillance, even try to kill them. So what's your point? bombmonger