CDR: Re: Abortion Assasination Politics likely going to Supremes
So when is APster coming out, which lets you trade lists of deserving people?
It may actually be extremely difficult to create an APster. ... The violent anti-abortion movement's method for coping with coexistent conflicting thoughts and behaviors is a form of dysfunction not unlike that of a stroke patient who sees himself in a mirror and is unable to perceive his own paralysis or similar paralysis in others. A moribund arm can be perceived as functioning normally. A half-paralyzed face can be perceived as smiling left and right. Amazing. Pathetic. Or criminal. Were I a doctor I would consider the Nuremberg Files site a direct and credible threat. The jury decision was the correct one. Were the roles swapped and abortion completely outlawed why does it seem unlikely that the legalize abortion movement would be listing for termination or firebombing Fundamentalists? Which would you prefer as your next door neighbor?
Tuesday September 12 5:11 AM ET Abortion Web Site Verdict Appealed
By WILLIAM McCALL, Associated Press Writer
PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) - Anti-abortion activists are asking a federal appeals court to overturn a $109 million verdict by a jury that decided a Web site and posters listing the names of abortion doctors and clinics were threats that went beyond free speech.
...
At issue is a Web site called The Nuremberg Files that listed hundreds of abortion doctors accused of committing crimes against humanity and invited readers to send in doctors addresses, license plate numbers and even the names of their children.
...
Last year, the dozen anti-abortion activists argued the posters and Web site were free speech protected under the First Amendment. Critics called it a hit list.
The jury was told by U.S. District Judge Robert Jones to consider the history of violence in the anti-abortion movement, including three doctors killed after their names appeared on the lists.
One was Dr. Barnett Slepian, who was gunned down by a sniper in October 1998 at his home near Buffalo, N.Y. Slepians name was crossed out on The Nuremberg Files Web site later that day.
...
This is a case that is built on history, Kelly said. You have had years of arson, shootings, death threats. How can that context be considered anything but a threat?
The Georgia computer programmer who ran the Nuremberg Files was not a defendant in the lawsuit. After the verdict, his Internet provider pulled the plug on the site.
Among the anti-abortion activists appealing the ruling is Michael Bray of Bowie, Md., author of a book that justifies killing doctors to stop abortions. Bray served time in federal prison from 1985 to 1989 for his role in arson attacks and bombings of seven clinics.
APster
Ladies and gentlemen, I think we have a winner here. Outstanding... Cogito neologo est, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah@ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
On Tue, 12 Sep 2000, Michael Motyka wrote:
The violent anti-abortion movement's method for coping with coexistent conflicting thoughts and behaviors is a form of dysfunction not unlike that of a stroke patient who sees himself in a mirror and is unable to perceive his own paralysis or similar paralysis in others. A moribund arm can be perceived as functioning normally. A half-paralyzed face can be perceived as smiling left and right. Amazing. Pathetic.
Or criminal. Were I a doctor I would consider the Nuremberg Files site a direct and credible threat. The jury decision was the correct one.
More to the point. Would a supreme court ruling in this respect be a good ruling. Trying to read someone's mind and trying him on his supposed thoughts is a little like convicting a man via ESP. Despite the fact that the man running the site wrote that killing abortion doctors would be justified, he did not explicitly state that these people or their families should be harmed. Shunned perhaps, protested against perhaps. But incitement to murder should have an extremely high standard of evidence and equally high protection of the supposed speech by the first amendment. The second point assumes that a common citizen would react by killing the people on his web page. If a cypherpunk copied his page and archived it on his website would it also be incitement to murder? The implication is that guilt or innocence is dependent upon the visitors to your web site. If the supreme upholds this it could set a precedent to go after any web site that publishes controversial data. By the same standard of evidence can we convict everyone that supplies data regarding drugs, machine gun construction techniques, bomb making info of 'knowing that someone would use it to nefarious ends?' The jury in this case says that the publisher of the information is responsible for the potential use of the information. And that is one long slippery slope. Not that Congress wouldn't be game. I think a more credible indictment would be charges of aiding and abetting the killers. Of course you need evidence for that. That takes real work from police detectives. Gosh, couldn't have any of that. For the record, I am not anti-abortion. jim -- Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural
participants (3)
-
Jim Burnes -
Michael Motyka -
R. A. Hettinga