Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bela_ghoulashi who wrote (4218)	10/10/2001 10:38:52 PM
From: Ilaine	Respond to of 281500

>>the safety and security of my fellow citizens from further attacks on our soil is infinitely more important to me than satisfying the idle, self-important curiosity of droning onlookers who are not directly in harm’s way.<< Agree wholeheartedly. Mq and many of the rest who are tub-thumping about "freedom of speech" don't even live in countries with a Bill of Rights, much less the First Amendment. Here in the USA we have a long history of excellent analysis of the First Amendment - free speech is subject to restraints on time, place and manner. Put in a nutshell, you don't have the right to falsely scream "fire" in a crowded theater. You have no free speech right to injure others, nor to threaten their health, safety or welfare, per se. Free speech is intended to foster public debate - so there is a tension involved here. But no court in the United States, and I dare say in the world, would require the dissemination of secret information which constituted a clear and present danger to human safety. "Clear and present danger" means imminent.