Someone please explain to me how gag orders surrounding trials came to be considered legally and morally acceptable. I don't understand the justification at all. Doesn't free speech necessarily entail the right to speak to the "court of public opinion"?
I can understand this sort of secrecy when classified information is involved, in that people who go into access willingly give up certain free speech rights-- they lose any right to disseminate the information-- but, in a case like this, it seems that weev (who would probably never pass a security clearance and get access to classified information) should have the right to say whatever he wants about what's happening to him.
He's kind of a douche. Between this [1] and his infatuation with the God-hates-gays Fred Phelps, his ties to antisemitism, etc, he strikes me as not a real nice guy.
[1] "Auernheimer claimed responsibility for the disruption to Amazon's services in April 2009 when many books on gay issues were reclassified as pornography."
Phelps is one of the greatest trolls of all time -- he started as a civil rights attorney 50 years ago, but his more recent shtick is to do provocative shit to get his civil rights violated so that he can sue. The infatuation is obvious.
4 comments
[ 17.9 ms ] story [ 497 ms ] threadI can understand this sort of secrecy when classified information is involved, in that people who go into access willingly give up certain free speech rights-- they lose any right to disseminate the information-- but, in a case like this, it seems that weev (who would probably never pass a security clearance and get access to classified information) should have the right to say whatever he wants about what's happening to him.
[1] "Auernheimer claimed responsibility for the disruption to Amazon's services in April 2009 when many books on gay issues were reclassified as pornography."
Phelps is one of the greatest trolls of all time -- he started as a civil rights attorney 50 years ago, but his more recent shtick is to do provocative shit to get his civil rights violated so that he can sue. The infatuation is obvious.