Comments on: Neo-Nazi Leader Convicted on Threat Charges, Again

By: Al Olmstead

Al Olmstead — Thu, 20 Jan 2011 08:15:38 +0000

The only thing more remarkable than the topics on which SPLC are fixated is that they are actually paid good money to operate a website that is fixated on such topics. Makes one wonder where that money comes from. But then, we know, don’t we? And it doesn’t have anything to do with providing legal services to the impoverished in the South, does it?

By: BDave

BDave — Tue, 11 Jan 2011 16:33:58 +0000

I especially love paying my taxes knowing that a hateful man like Bill White is being kept behind bars.

By: jenwren

jenwren — Sat, 08 Jan 2011 00:31:33 +0000

It seems to me we could have a reasonable finding based on both probable intent, and context. We all know that public speech has been used, for example in Rwanda on its radio broadcasts, first to discredit and alienate individuals or specific groups of people, and only then to incite violence against them.
We might all reason differently about such a use of personal information if it were posted in such a way, about ourselves and our own families. ACLU is vital, but its m.o. can be more nuanced under certain circumstances.

By: Fredric L. Rice

Fredric L. Rice — Fri, 07 Jan 2011 19:11:48 +0000

The Jury ruled wrongly in this case. Even though the Christian web site was filled with violence and was juxtapositioned with the foreman’s information, that *still* is considered protected speech — or it should be. The ACLU was correct.

By: Africanus Germanicisus Julianus

Africanus Germanicisus Julianus — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 21:03:07 +0000

I don’t think that’s funny – or, no, wait; yes I do – it’s as funny a ‘White Supremacists Bowel Movement’.