The Privacy/Untraceability Sweet Spot

[measl at mfn.org]

On Thu, 30 Aug 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 30, 2001 at 09:12:50PM -0500, measl at mfn.org wrote:
> > On Wed, 29 Aug 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote:
> > 
> > <much true stuff snipped>
> > 
> > > But
> > > even given the tattered First Amendment, there is still a difference
> > > between speech and action.
> > 
> > Complete and utter bullshit.
> 
> "Measl" sometimes posts worthy stuff, 

Today must be "my day"!  I get a "tahnk you for the cite" from Tim, and a
semi-nod from Declan.  Shit, a guy could have a heart attack this
way <giggle>!

> so instead of flaming him, I'll
> just say that much of First Amendment jurisprudence is based on the
> distinctions between speech and action. It is not an absolute line,
> of course, speech ("give me your money or else", falsely shouting
> fire in a crowded theater, fighting words) can be suppressed, but it
> is a useful distinction nonetheless.

I will grant that in my red-flag state (above), I was obviously not clear,
so let me make my argument clearer.

My point was that we have long since departed from the long line of
"jurisprudence" to which you refer above.  In real terms, in the USA
today, there is no difference between speech and action (from the legal
point of view).  I am not talking here of the theoretical way that things
"should be" (and that are taught in larvae school as the way things
_are_), I am talking about how it really *is*, when you are actually in
the courtrooms, at the mercy of the fascists who are to "judge" you.

Remember Mr. London: "He has not recanted", and "Its still posted on the
internet today"...

*Perfect* example.

Other interesting examples are most certainly familiar to many of the
members of the list - certainly I cannot be the only one of us who has had
personal visits from federal badge holders because of political views
expressed here?

> -Declan

-- 
Yours, 
J.A. Terranson
sysadmin at mfn.org

If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they
should give serious consideration towards setting a better example:
Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of
unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in
the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and 
elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire
populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate...
This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States
as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers,
associates, or others.  Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of
those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the
first place...
--------------------------------------------------------------------