Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!apple!vsi1!wyse!mips!prls!philabs!linus!raybed2!rayssd!mirror!frog!john From: john@frog.UUCP (John Woods) Newsgroups: news.misc Subject: Re: Freedom of hate Message-ID: <1216@frog.UUCP> Date: 5 Apr 89 23:11:00 GMT References: <14130@gryphon.COM> <8132@chinet.chi.il.us> Organization: Misanthropes-R-Us Lines: 72 One more time, a voice of reason will try to explain the difference between Constitutionally protected freedom of speech and a USENET posting account. The exasperation of the author will become apparent by the end of the message. In article <8132@chinet.chi.il.us>, patrick@chinet.chi.il.us (Patrick A. Townson) writes: > In article <14130@gryphon.COM> richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) writes: > It sort of reminds one of the way Mr. Verity > at Penn State responds to troublesome speech-makers. > Oh, you mean Mr. Verity had a group of campus policemen blackjack this fool down at Campus Police headquarters in a windowless room? Or did Mr. Verity simply have the Penn State army shoot him? Perhaps he let him off easy, and just locked the toad in his dorm room and announced that anyone talking with him would be arrested? --> GET A CLUE: <-- Governments have powers to prevent any discussion of ideas, any time, anywhere. Mr. Verity simply enforced Penn State's right not to pay for someone's odious behavior. > If the American Nazis can go to the village of Skokie with the blessings > of a federal judge and the ACLU has the nerve to blanket it in free speech Because the government of Skokie did not have the Constitutional authority to prevent these odious people from expressing their ideas in public in a peaceable assembly. Had they decided to do so on someone's lawn instead of the public street they could have been driven off with gunfire if needed. > then why can't Whitehead go to the 'electronic village' called soc.motss > and advocate the same hateful things? Because the vast majority of people who own and pay for USENET machines don't want (a) odious postings of this magnitude (b) in newsgroups where they aren't welcome. > >Two things are guarenteed to get your net.access pulled. 1) doing > >something illegal and getting caught and..... > Speech is never illegal in this country, according to the ACLU. Wrong. It is clear that you specifically intend never to understand the Constitution, or possibly anything at all. > Whitehead did not generate all the messages which went back to his site. > Those were generated by the users who wrote him or his sysadmin -- not > the other way around. Whitehead wrote one message, posted a dozen places. Posted twice, note, when the first posting generated very little flamage. > How many of you wrote back, cross posting everywhere in the process? > So who was the biggest waster of bandwidth? > "It wasn't my fault! I was just pointing my Uzi in the mall at random! All those people who deliberately got in the way of the bullets are at fault!" > I just thought I doubt that. > it funny that a group of people (homosexuals) who for many > years have been among the biggest allies of the American 'Civil Liberties' > Union one day got their own oxe gored. Their own little village got > invaded by someone who came to spread hate and discontent. And after years > of indoctrination in The True Meaning Of Free Speech And The American Way, > *they suddenly forgot, or chose to ignore all their lessons*. > Since you have made so abundantly clear that you think freedom of speech means the right to say anything, anywhere, anytime, I will let your local Klan know that you've invited them to have their next meeting in your living room. And don't you DARE try to suppress their freedom to spout evil _in your living room_, because it's their RIGHT, right? Enjoy! -- John Woods, Charles River Data Systems, Framingham MA, (508) 626-1101 ...!decvax!frog!john, john@frog.UUCP, ...!mit-eddie!jfw, jfw@eddie.mit.edu Remainder Khomeini!