Re: Using ad serving software for censoring news stories

["Brian Loe" <knobdy () gmail com>]

On 8/30/06, Drsolly <drsollyp () drsolly com> wrote:
> > Didn't get what right the first time around? The First Amendment WAS
> > our first time - after kicking our "lords" (your king) out. The first
> > ten "Amendments" are called the Bill of Rights and were written to
> > guarantee the passage of the Constitution.
>
> Ah, right. This is your theory that "to amend" doesn't mean "to correct"
> and that an "amendment" isn't a "correction".

I see you have been to lazy to go read up on this since the last time
we had this conversation. I could school you on the various
definitions of "amend" and "amendment" but I think I'll just TRY and
REiterate what I've told you before. The Bill of Rights ADD TO our
Consitution. Since our Constitution ONLY governs what the GOVERNMENT
can do, how IT is formed, etc, the Bill of Rights simply provided a
list of ENUMERATED rights guaranteed to us. There are lots of rights
that aren't discussed, but still valid. These are the most basic human
rights - those shared by every human in the world, should they choose
to excercise them.


> > If you are referring to the Articles of Confederation, I'd like to
> > hear your arguments about our limited free speech under those
> > contracts...
>
> Don't ask me about the miscellaneous collection of documents that you
> collectively refer to as your "Constitution"

We have only ONE "Consitution". The Articles of Confederation for a
stop-gap measure employed before the Constitution was ratified -
basically, before we had a form of government. For someone who claims
to know so much about my country, you seem to know very little.

> > In the US there is a presumption of innocence as well - but that only
> > governs the courts (jururists). See, here in the US our Constitution
> > only governs the government and our papers are free to print whatever
> > they like so long as they don't libel or slander.
> >
> > Our papers are also free to call a spade a spade - terrorists, after
> > all, ARE terrorists.
>
> It's true that terrorists are terrorists. I can't disagree with you there.
> Men are men, women are women, and small brown furry things are small brown
> furry things. See, I can do tautologies too.
>
> But what are people who are *accused* of being terrorists, but not yet
> tried in a court of law? We call them "suspects", or "defendents", or
> possibly even "alleged terrorists".

As do our officials. I'll be damned, however, if the government is
going to govern MY opinion. Maybe in the UK your papers are made up of
officials? They're not the PEOPLE excersing a RIGHT to a FREE PRESS.


> In England, the right to a fair trial, trumps freedom of speech. And
> that's how it should be. You might be happy for people to be tried and
> convicted by the press, but that's not the British Way of Life.

Really? I beg to differ, but, oh well...

> I don't know the collection of assorted documents that you collectovely
> call your "Constitution" and then endlessly argue over exactly what these
> holy documents actually mean, says about this. Maybe there's an American
> on this list who could offer an informed opinion?

I'm sure there are - but you're already refusing to listen to one of
them. Hey, try this, see if you can't actually find THE document I'm
talking about online. It should be pretty easy, being named "The
Constitution of the United States of America" and all...


> In US law, does the right to a fair trial trump freedom of the press, or
> is the press allowed to try and convict anyone who they think would give
> them a boost in sales?

No, it does not. As I said, you're free to have your own opinion - and
share it as you wish. Has your beloved King crushed all of the blogs
that may or may not be calling these people terrorists yet?
_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.