[IP] more on Gerard Van der Leun on traitors, free speech, and Ashcroftitus

[Dave Farber <dave@farber.net>]

------ Forwarded Message
From: "John S. Quarterman" <jsq@quarterman.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 04:00:20 -0500
To: dave@farber.net
Cc: "John S. Quarterman" <jsq@quarterman.com>
Subject: Re: [IP] Gerard Van der Leun on traitors, free speech, and
Ashcroftitus

>Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 18:15:08 -0700
>Subject: Re: FC: Jamie McCarthy on "treason" claims from the right and the
>    left
>From: Gerard Van der Leun <gvdl@cox.net>
>To: <declan@well.com>
>Message-ID: <BB27802C.1F69%gvdl@cox.net>
>In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.0.20030701162607.0445c1d8@mail.well.com>

>...

>Hence I don't see from what source all the anxiety arises about charges of
>treason and suppression of speech as long as it arises from an individual or
>an organization with no formal ties to the government.
>
>Should the government actively see to put someone on trial for treason, I
>think they would probably need more than Anne Coulter's observations and
>assertions. Indeed, the requirements for such a charge are spelled out in
>some detail in the Constitution as I recall, but I won't rehearse them here.

The argument seems to be that someone has to have formal ties to the
government
to influence the government.  I wonder how that explains William Randolph
Hearst and the Spanish-American War?  Remember the Maine?

Or Walter Winchell, who was a supporter of Senator McCarthy in the 1950s,
providing leverage through his radio and television shows and columns.
Winchell also carried on longterm correspondence with J. Edgar Hoover
at the FBI:
 http://foia.fbi.gov/winchell.htm

It's not clear to me that having no formal ties to the government
stopped Winchell from having quite a bit of influence inside and outside
the government.

Also, Senator McCarthy didn't use formal charges of treason; he didn't need
to.

>Likewise, should the government attempt to formally shut down Politechbot in
>response to something transmitted on it, it had better be something akin to
>childporn or a secret terrorist message embedded deep within that jpeg of
>Phil Zimmermann (very clever that) to avoid a firestorm of protest and the
>launching of 30  Habeas Corpus packing ACLU lawyers from their underground
>silos in San Francisco.

If copyright violation is alleged, the DMCA requires no
judge, jury, or trial.  And I wonder how habeas corpus
is relevant if nobody is locked up.

John S. Quarterman <jsq@quarterman.com>


------ End of Forwarded Message

-------------------------------------
To manage your subscription, go to
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/