Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Sat, 4 Sep 1999 16:30:49 -0400 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Does this extend as far as crying "FIRE!" in a crowded theatre?
Stoneking
----- Original Message -----
From: Joe Brennan <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, September 04, 1999 3:26 PM
Subject: Re: Pound's castle
> In a message dated 9/4/99 2:49:39 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> [log in to unmask] writes:
>
> << In an earlier posting it was suggested that EP was
> excercising his rights udner the US Constitution, which seems to me an
> indefensible premise. When you go over to the other side during a war,
> you would seem to forfeit some constitutional protections. >>
>
>
> it's common knowledge that if Pound had made his broadcasts within the US,
> his speech would have been protected -- leaving some to believe that his
> rights should have been protected in any event. this, sadly, was not the
> case, as the US government believed, apparently along with mainstream
Bill,
> that he had no "constitutional rights." I may be wrong about this, but as
> far as I know, Pound didn't "go over to the other side" in that he never
took
> up arms against his country, nor advocated that others do it. I believe
in
> the exercise of free speech, even if it's unpopular or even hateful, and
even
> in times of war.
>
> jb.....
>
|
|
|