Re: Townsend

["Dan Billings" <billings@suscom-maine.net>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Faneuf" <tklaundry@juno.com>
To: <mlaurence@mindspring.com>
Cc: <tklaundry@juno.com>; <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 1:09 PM
Subject: Re: Townsend


> So, to take this the next step would a reporter/writer face similar
> charges if they wanted to do a piece on how a terrorist cell works and
> did research on various websites that might put forward beliefs that the
> Administration might consider treasonous or terrorist in nature?

If the reporter became part of the actual conspiracy to commit a terrorist
act, the reporter could be prosecuted.

Simply advocating the destruction of the US government or even advocating
terrorist attacks is protected by the First Amendment.  Taking steps to put
such a plan into action is not protected.  This line may not be easy to
define but I do not see how simply viewing a terrorist site would violate
any law.  A reporter going under cover and becoming part of a terrorist
group could easily cross a line into criminality.  That is basically what
the NPR reporter did.  He crossed the line into purchasing and distributing
illegal images.

When it comes to child pornography, the Supreme Court has held that it is
not protected speech.

-- Dan Billings, Bowdoinham, Maine