Thursday, October 29, 2009

If there is no justice, there is no anything

A Startling Proposition : The Department of Justice Finds Itself "Not Guilty"!

By Don Siegelman (about the author) Permalink

Don Siegelman

After the Department of Justice investigated itself and found itself "Not Guilty", Chairman John Conyers and Members of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee told Attorney General Holder, in a letter of September 25, 2009, that the Department of Justice had done an inadequate job of reviewing government prosecutors misconduct in the Siegelman case.

Chairman Conyers and the Committee urged Eric Holder ""to ensure that fresh eyes, with no connection to the underlying case and no investment in any particular outcome, lead and conduct this crucial review!"

But to add insult to injury, President Obama has not replaced the Rove/Bush U.S. Attorney who is prosecuting me. Remember, her office indicted me during my reelection campaign, while her husband was my opponent's campaign manager!

Here's what one California observer had to say: "I called Eric Holder's office this morning. I went through the spiel about firing this particular, unethical, Bush DOJ holdover and replace her with someone who has honor and respects the concept of justice. I'm so sick of the tyranny of the minority in this country. How do we get President Obama to throw the scoundrels under the bus and stand up for righteousness?"

We are continuing to make progress, but we need your personal help! Please let the President know how you feel about getting rid of the Rove/Bush U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Alabama and replacing her with an honest and ethical one! This very important, not only to me, but to everyone in our country who sees the absolute necessity of having honest prosecutors!

Please let the President know that you want the U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Alabama, Leura Canary, immediately replaced and investigated for her actions in my case [phone: (202)456-1414; fax:(202)456-2416]. A phone call or hand written note would be greatly appreciated. It would also help a great deal if you sent it to your member of Congress and your two U.S. Senators.

If you want tocontact the White House quickly and easily and let the President know how you feel about getting rid of the Rove/Bush prosecutors go to to send your message.

Thanks so much,

Don Siegelman
Governor of Alabama 1999-2003
3963 River View Drive
Birmingham, Al 35243

* * * *
* * * *

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Am I a Turd in a Punchbowl?

Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal [official website]

Below text sent to:,

subject of email: Is there a corrupt organization running Connecticut? A Tip

Text of email:
I posted a piece on my Judicial Misconduct blog [here] regarding a Connecticut Judicial Union employee, Cynthia Egan, allegedly making personal charges on a company card and allegedly getting a promotion. I also would like to share information where it seems a corrupt organization is running pretty much everything in Connecticut Government. I would like you to look at the post on AFSCME International []

Please send any questions or comments to me by email.

Monday, October 26, 2009

Pissing and Shitting on the American Flag

I don't recommend doing this:

The above image [stolen from here] and then cropped

According to some US state laws, you might face hefty fines and jail time just for talking about the above. Luckily I'm not in Vermont talking about this or posting this. [Vermont law on flag desecration]

If I would post [something like this], would I feel I have an excuse to make a video or take pictures of the pissing, or worse, on the American flag? To more and more people, the American flag represents an out of control government with a pretend legal system abusing its people, burning, maiming, and killing its citizens in bogus wars for oil, for the importation of drugs, covert ops, and to make operatives in the war corporations rich so they can bribe more and more elected politicians.

* * * *
* * * *

Added Jan. 9, 2010:

Text supplied with above video posted in 2008
On Tuesday April 15th an "art" project was put up at the Student Center at the University of Maine at Farmington. It is of note that we did not put on this display and we do not support this display. Also, people were threatened with arrest if they picked up the flags off the ground.

[click here] for:

Proposed Legislation removing Hoover's name from FBI

Saturday, October 24, 2009

Who are the real terrorists?

The below [found here]
Iran finds new evidence on deadly blast
Sat, 24 Oct 2009 07:45:13 GMT
Font size :
Abdulhamid Rigi, the apprehended brother of the Jundallah point-man, had confirmed ties with the US in a recent interview with Press TV
After a series of intensive investigations into the deadly bomb blast in southeastern Iran, new revelations show that the 24-year-old culprit was trained and equipped in Pakistan.

"Based on our latest findings, the bomber was none other than Abdolvahed Mohammadizadehhad, who had recently gone to Pakistan to recieve specialized terrorist training," Jalal Sayyah, Deputy Chief for security affairs in the Sistan-Baluchestan Province, said early Saturday.

Sayyah said the findings were confirmed following the confession of those who were arrested for having links with the Jundallah group.

"Fully-trained with bombs and explosives, he was then sent to Iran to carry out this tragic incident," he said, referring to a bomb blast that killed more than 40 people on Sunday in the borderline region of Pishin.

The Pakistan-based Jundallah terrorist group has claimed responsibility for the attack. At least 41 people were killed by an explosion during a conference between Sunni and Shia tribal leaders to strengthen unity among the people in the region.

Spearheaded by Abdulmalek Rigi, Jundallah terrorists have staged a tidal wave of bombings and terrorist attacks in Iran, one of which left at least 25 Iranians dead in early June.

Abdulhamid Rigi, the apprehended brother of the Jundallah point-man, told Press TV in a recent interview that Abdulmalek had held several "confidential" meetings with FBI and CIA agents in Karachi and Islamabad.

He added that during one of the meetings, two female US agents had offered weapons, safe bases in Afghanistan and professional trainers and had attempted to recruit volunteers.

Robert Baer, a former Middle East CIA field officer, revealed Saturday that Washington had formed relations with the Jundallah group, while aware of its terrorist nature.

"American intelligence has also had contact with Jundallah. But that contact, as Iran almost certainly knows, was confined to intelligence-gathering on the country," Baer wrote on the

Baer said the close relations between the US and the terror group were to such extent that Jundallah had once been considered "as a piece in a covert-action campaign against Iran."

His remarks have raised alarming questions about the US involvement in the recent wave of terrorist attacks in Iran.


Friday, October 23, 2009

Are Top Police Officers Complicit in the Drug Trade?

image stolen [from here]

Are police merely part of a US drug delivery system? Are only cops who are competition, get in the way, break ranks, or who commit acts too embarrassing for other cops, punished?

Well, I ask those questions, and more, here:

"US Crime Farming- Intro" on [found here]

"US Crime Farming" post found the [here]

Thursday, October 22, 2009

Hostile Work Environments

Not all hostile work environments are as cut and dry as sexual harassment, violence in the workplace, and/or obvious unprofessional conduct and threatening actions and words. It is good to keep a diary with dates, details of incidents, and witnesses to the offenses. There can be criminal as well as civil infractions. Compensation can come from either the civil or criminal side, or can even be a combination of both. These cases can often generate a lot of publicity and damages to be recovered can be quite large.

Some cases one can possibly pursue Pro Se. Enduring sexual harassment and a hostile work environment might not be a good case to pursue yourself. Lawyers can be searched for here:

Crimes, misdemeanors and felonies, should be reported. Unfortunately, if the abuser settles a civil case, a criminal case might be averted, and an abuser might not get criminally punished for criminal acts.

There are many issues to consider before considering continuing to work in a hostile work environment, or in considering taking any actions. Retaining an attorney who has experience and a track record in these cases just might be your best bet.

* * * *
* * * *

This blogger's email:

My other blog:

The text of my July 27, 2009 letter to Obama [found here]

Typical Government Insider?

... 99.9% of them doing the same as Bernie Kerik don't get arrested and don't face prison time.

October 20, 2009, 1:56 pm
Bernard Kerik Is Sent to Jail
By Stacey Stowe

Spencer Platt/Getty Images Bernard B. Kerik, the former New York City police commissioner, arriving at the courthouse in White Plains on Tuesday

Updated, 6:01 p.m. | A federal judge on Tuesday revoked bail for Bernard B. Kerik, the former New York police commissioner who is facing conspiracy and fraud charges.

Judge Stephen C. Robinson of Federal District Court in White Plains said Mr. Kerik could not be trusted to honor a consent order prohibiting him from revealing confidential information. The judge cited an email that Mr. Kerik sent to the head of his defense fund that apparently included such information.

Mr. Kerik had been allowed to remain free on $500,000 bail, which was secured by his house in New Jersey. The judge turned down a request by Mr. Kerik’s lawyers to keep him from being put behind bars for 48 hours while they prepare an appeal.

Before revoking the bail of Mr. Kerik, Judge Robinson described him as a “toxic combination of self-minded focus and arrogance, and I fear that combination leads him to believe his ends justify his means.”

“He sees the court’s rulings as an inconvenience,” Judge Robinson said, “something to be ignored, and an obstacle to be circumvented.”

After the proceeding, Mr. Kerik loosened his tie and removed papers and a wallet from his pockets. He then carefully took off a chain and medallion and handed it to one of his lawyers. He was led away, not in handcuffs, by court officers.

Jury selection in the trial is to begin Monday. Mr. Kerik was indicted in November 2007 on corruption, conspiracy and tax fraud charges, and he was arraigned on Dec. 29, 2008, on additional charges that he prepared false tax returns. He pleaded not guilty.

Mr. Kerik served as the city’s correction and police commissioners under Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, and he gained an international reputation after the Sept. 11 attacks as he was often at Mr. Giuliani’s side.

Two years after he left office, Mr. Kerik was nominated to lead the Department of Homeland Security, in part because of Mr. Giuliani’s recommendation.

Mr. Kerik soon withdrew the nomination, citing his failure to pay taxes on an illegal immigrant whom he had hired as his nanny. News reports soon followed, exploring financial entanglements and ethical problems that led the city to begin an investigation.

During a hearing last month, Judge Robinson criticized Mr. Kerik and his lawyers for what he said were various offenses committed by a lawyer who heads Mr. Kerik’s legal defense fund. The judge said the lawyer, Anthony K. Modafferi, sent e-mail messages to him and to The Washington Times that defamed government prosecutors.

Mr. Modafferi violated a consent order because in some of his e-mail messages, he leaked information that indicated he was privy to sealed court papers, Judge Robinson said at last month’s hearing. The judge then ordered Mr. Kerik to file an affidavit detailing his legal arrangement with Mr. Modafferi, whom the judge said may end up being called to testify in documents or in court.

The judge now believes that Mr. Kerik sent Mr. Modafferi an email containing the information that the lawyer then passed along. It was that email that apparently violated the consent decree, causing Mr. Kerik to be jailed. The specifics details that should not have been released were not revealed on Tuesday.

* * * *
* * * *

Saturday, October 17, 2009

Paul Craig Roberts

Paul Craig Roberts on Alex Jones Tv 1/4:The Rich Have Stolen the Economy

Text with video:
Alex welcomes back to the show economist, former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan Administration, nationally syndicated columnist, former editor and columnist for the Wall Street Journal, Business Week, and Scripps Howard News Service, Paul Craig Roberts. [video source]

* * * *

Paul Craig Robert's [post on]

* * * *

Mr. Roberts was, or still is, a government insider. He gives his thoughts on George W. Bush, Obama, the US Dollar, war, etc. I don't agree with all that he says, but why not listen to his interesting points?

* * * *
* * * *

Look here in the future for some videos I have yet to shoot and will post here:

I have time and will be working on some of my personal issues along with covering more political events, posting video, interviews, and commentary.

Friday, October 16, 2009

Cellphone Spying and Tracking Technology

I learned about a lot of the capabilities of spying on people, using cellphones the hard way. I have been told recently that I have to be concerned about my safety and about being tracked so harm can be done to me. Am I being paranoid?

Well, I have been told that I would not be safe in any state by a former employer who has allegedly committed at the minimum of infractions, if not broken state and federal laws. For whatever reasons I have not been staying in the same place and have altered my schedule and who I visit. And I do nothing on any set schedule and have no predictable place to be. I have learned in the past how criminals with connections operate. [post on the criminal/cop connection]

In Connecticut when I owned rental properties I had a feud with the Connecticut State Police over lack of protection and service. They were "utilizing" drug dealers, vandals, prostitutes, and other criminals as "informants". I tried to have Judge Jonathan J. Kaplan of Rockville Vernon Connecticut Superior Court removed through legislators for his bias against landlords, the self-employed, and contractors in civil cases. I wrote letters to the editor critical of the court system and of police. I later found out that the Judicial Branch is mainly about defrauding taxpayers and in protecting insiders of a rigged system. [insiders speak out]

I wondered how Connecticut State Police Officers would find me, usually in pairs of cruisers, no matter where I was shopping, working, or socializing. I would be followed around hours and even days at a time. I back out of my driveway to have a cruiser follow me around everywhere. I was told that if I didn't sell my property, shut up, and leave the state that they, the Connecticut State Police would arrest me and see me off to prison.

I found out from an alleged Connecticut State Police Registered Confidential Informant Barbara Sattal that my cellphone was being monitored and my location was being tracked by police. She told me that all that I did, read, and received on the internet was being monitored by police and they had planned on seeing me beat up, maybe killed, and/or set up to be railroaded to prison for my "Big Mouth". [that story][more background and links].

If parents can spy on their kids, use GPS to find the exact location of their kids 24/7, and if their conversations can be monitored in real time or recorded for later review, anyone anywhere has to have concerns regarding their complete lack of privacy whatsoever.

So, if you are a woman with a male stalker, political activist, or just piss off someone willing to go the distance, anything you say, do, or anywhere you go can be monitored if you don't pay attention.

Click on below title for story or information:

World Tracker turns anyone into a cellphone spy

Mobile Cell Phone Number Tracking Tracing

* * * *

This blogger's email:

* * * *
* * * *

If police officers are getting caught with drugs, scales, sale paraphernalia, are handing out guns to known felons, and judicial branch managers are defrauding taxpayers, what does that say about the current state of affairs in the USA? [post]

* * * *
* * * *

How to take back America with a "People's Grand Jury System":

[click here] for the text of my July 27, 2009, letter to Obama

The World War One Origins of Corporate Communism

Excerpt from [here]:

The Wilson Administration gained control by repressing the Constitutional Rights of citizens; upwards of 150,000 of them were sitting in prison for questioning government policy and entry into the war.

A woman wrote to a newspaper. "I am for the people and the government is for the profiteers." For her dangerous sentiment she received a sentence of ten years.

A number of corporations and their political hacks utilized the sedition laws to suppress and to disband labor unions.

Federal Agents tied up the motion picture "The Spirit of '76." They claimed the film showed the British redcoats in an unfavorable light. The film producer got ten years in jail for his effort. [more]

* * * *

Comment to Steven G. Erickson from Jason Paz, author of the above:
The USA Remains a Dictatorship

One of my sources for the article stated WWI Germany was more democratic than the WWI USA. That was contrary to everything I had been taught about the era. It showed me how hard it is to shake off the myths of propaganda and information control.

George Pullman [of sleeping car fame] had Eugene V. Debs locked for leading a strike by the sleeping car porters' union. Lawyer Clarence Darrow defended Debs by proving the railroad officials had colluded to frame Debs for interfering with the US mails. Acquitted on the mail charge, Debs returned to prison by a bogus conspiracy charge.

Later, corrupt Los Angeles officials almost convicted Darrow with a bogus charge of bribing a juror in an anarchist bombing case. If the first corrupt official doesn't get you, the second one will.

I am somewhat familiar with your railroading in Connecticut. If you want to swap horror stories, you have my address.

The Federal Marshals falsely accused me of Airport terrorism.

* * * *
* * * *
* * * *

If police officers are getting caught with drugs, scales, sale paraphernalia, are handing out guns to known felons, and judicial branch managers are defrauding taxpayers, what does that say about the current state of affairs in the USA? [post]

Thursday, October 08, 2009

Viking Bad Cop News:

Back to Google News
Ex-cop pleads not guilty to posing as twin for sex
Associated Press

(AP) – 15 hours ago

MILFORD, Conn. — A former Connecticut police officer has pleaded not guilty to allegations he posed as his twin brother to have sex with a woman, and then raped her when she realized the ruse and tried to leave.

Twenty-five-year-old Jared Rohrig of Milford appeared in Milford Superior Court on Wednesday. He says he's innocent of first-degree sexual assault and criminal impersonation charges.

The victim told Milford police that she was in a relationship with Rohrig's brother, Joseph, and went to see him at the Rohrigs' home in July.

Police say the woman realized during sex that she was with Jared Rohrig, because he didn't have a tattoo like his brother. She alleges Jared Rohrig continued the sex against her will when she tried to leave.

Jared Rohrig resigned from the Orange police department last month.

Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

* * * *
* * * *

[click here] for:

The Connecticut State Trooper Gene Pool?

* * * *
* * * *

Holen Sie sich die Justiz Koalition


It's Not the Prosecutors' Committee, it's the Judiciary Committee

By Russ Feingold (about the author) Page 1 of 1 page(s) Permalink

For OpEdNews: Russ Feingold - Writer
Reprinted from Daily Kos
Bad news today from the Judiciary Committee. At the beginning of the year, I had high hopes for the Patriot Act reauthorization process. We had just elected a President with a strong civil liberties record in the Senate. His Attorney General had supported some reforms during consideration of the last reauthorization bill in 2005. And Democrats controlled the Senate by such a large margin that our advantage on the Judiciary Committee ended up at 12-7 after Sen. Specter switched parties. Even as recently as 10 days ago, I hoped to be able to support a reauthorization bill introduced by Sen. Leahy that, while narrower than the JUSTICE Act that Senator Durbin and I have championed, did contain several important and necessary protections for the privacy of innocent Americans.

Events over the past two weeks dashed those hopes. Over the course of two business meetings, Sen. Leahy's bill was diluted to the point that I had to vote against it. It falls well short of what the Congress must do to correct the problems with the Patriot Act.

Before I get into the specific provisions that concern me, I want to say how disappointed I was in the debate in the committee. Today particularly, I started to feel as if too many members of the committee from both parties are willing to accept uncritically whatever the executive branch says about even the most reasonable proposed changes in the law. Of course we should consider the perspective of the FBI and the Justice Department. Keeping Americans safe is everyone's priority. But we also need to consider a full range of perspectives and come to our own conclusions about how best to protect the American people and preserve their freedoms.

Protecting the rights of innocent people should be a part of that equation. It's not the Prosecutors' Committee; it's the Judiciary Committee. And whether the executive branch powers are overbroad is something we have to decide. The only people we should be deferring to are the American people, as we try to protect them from terrorism without infringing on their freedoms.

I am also very troubled that administration officials have been taking positions behind closed doors that they are not taking publicly. I am pleased that we have not heard the type of public fear-mongering from this administration that was such a regular part of the discourse in the past. But if the administration wanted to further water down the already limited reforms in the bill that was on the table, they should have said so openly. Instead, at our only public hearing we were told that the Justice Department did not have positions on the crucial issues about to be discussed. Then, over the past week, in classified settings, the Department has weighed in against even some of the limited reforms that Sen. Leahy originally proposed. That led to the unusual spectacle today where many members of the committee based their decision to further weaken the bill on a classified briefing held yesterday, but could not fully discuss or debate their reasons. As a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, I am privy to every bit of the classified information that was referred to today. And nothing presented in the classified briefings justifies the failure to address the real problems with the expiring Patriot Act provisions and other intrusive powers.

Furthermore, much of this debate is not about classified matters. Continuing to hide behind a veil of secrecy is not fair to Congress or to the American people.

Specifically, the bill reported out of the Committee today on an 11-8 vote (five Republicans and only three Democrats voted No) fell short in a few key areas. Perhaps the most important was the failure to include the reasonable 3-part standard for issuing a FISA business records order under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act. This standard was in a bill unanimously reported by the Committee, under Republican control, in 2005, and it was in Sen. Leahy's original bill this year.

Last week, Senator Durbin offered an amendment to put the standard back in the bill. It would have ensured that these secret authorities can only be directed at individuals who have some connection to terrorism or espionage. The standard is broad and flexible, but it places some limits on this otherwise very sweeping authority. Unfortunately, Senator Durbin's amendment failed. When it did, I hoped the Committee would instead consider at least adopting that same standard for issuing National Security Letters, which are not approved by any court, and which were seriously abused by the FBI. Today, that, too, was rejected.

The bill that passed out of committee did include some positive changes. I was pleased my amendment to reform invasive "sneak and peek" searches was included, as well as my amendment to require the executive branch to issue minimization procedures for NSLs. But these improvements did not make up for the bill's shortcomings, and I was unable to support it on the final vote.

I appreciate Chairman Leahy's efforts to achieve a compromise. And I hope to work with him and other members of this committee to make further improvements as this bill goes forward. In the end, however, Democrats have to decide if they are going to stand up for the rights of the American people or allow the FBI to write our laws. For me, that's not a difficult choice.

US Senator from Wisconsin

Monday, October 05, 2009

From Ken Tucker's Watching TV Blog:

[found here]

David Letterman: Freedom of speech victim, or self-censoring?


Ever since David Letterman delivered his extraordinary revelations last Thursday, I’ve been checking in at CBS’ website for that 10-minute clip. I wanted to embed the clip in what I wrote about the incident, so you could see it for yourself and compare your opinion against mine.

But as The New York Times reports, not only has that clip never been placed on CBS’ website, but the network is doing its best to keep it off YouTube as well. As a result, now you can’t even see the Letterman clip on my original post about the extortion and sex story.

CBS’ reasoning is obvious, from a big-business perspective: CBS most likely finds Letterman’s meticulously worded mea culpa embarrassing and thinks the controversy will go away faster if it makes the clip go away. Another way to look at this: a source close to the Late Show confirmed to EW that Letterman’s production company Worldwide Pants asked CBS to not stream the video and the network obliged.

Either way, I think it’s a mistake. Now there are tons of people who’ll keep trying to post that clip to defy the network’s clampdown. Meanwhile, folks will, in their imaginations, misremember what Letterman said, and perhaps think what he admitted to was worse than was actually uttered. (”Hey, didn’t Dave say he also liked to dress up in Johnny Carson’s underwear? No?”)

CBS is clearly keeping track of what gets posted on its website now. You can find Friday’s cheerful interview with Larry David now on, but you can’t see that night’s other guest, Olivia Wilde. Why? I suspect it’s because, in the course of telling a story about how she moved into a bus with her husband, the House star said flirtily to Dave, “I’m sure you could get many, many women to move into your car with you.” Uh-oh…

On the CBS website, there’s a written summary of that night’s show, but Wilde’s comment isn’t transcribed.

So if you have Dave’s Thursday admission on your DVR, keep it: You’ve got a collector’s item.

What do you think about the suppression of Letterman’s comments?

* * * *
* * * *

Black on Letterman:

From NH Watchdog blog:

[found here]

Freedom of Speech in the Internet Age- Part II

Over at Blue Hampshire, JimC is upset at the radio host Howie Carr is trying to find out the identity of an anonymous critic, and has offered a $2,000 reward.

Like I said on BMG, this is a classless move, and I think it's a freedom of the press issue.

Some background: the state GOP sued over the Senate appointment law. A judge quickly ruled against them, and Howie Carr (recently described by Dan Kennedy as the Bill O'Reilly of Boston media) wrote a column attacking the judge.

"Ernie Boch III" wrote a blog post calling for a boycott of Carr's advertisers. (It was atypical of him; EBIII is usually snarky.) Yesterday morning, the lead story in the Herald was Carr's column attacking EBIII for "posing" as someone else. And yesterday afternoon, on Carr's radio show, Boch offered the reward.

The pose rhetoric is an absurd charge. There is no Ernie Boch III to pose as; it is a joke as recognizable as the Sons of Sam Horn, a Red Sox blog.

I suspect that Howie Carr and Ernie Boch Jr. think this is all a big joke, but $2,000 is enough to draw a crazy person, and this is sponsored press harassment.
JimC and I had a little colloquy about anonymity and the Internet back in August, but that case involved a court order in a possible defamation case.

There is no First Amendment issue here, because there is no government involvement. Whether this case is an attack of press freedom apart from the First Amendment is a separate question, but I still don't think it rises to a threat on journalism.

Ernie Boch III has every right to withhold his identity. However, he can't force others to not care who he is, or take steps to find out. JimC seems to think that the act of criticism itself shields the anonymous blogger from counter-criticism, or from his targets wanting to know more about who's attacking them.

I've never seen any real distinction between freedom of speech and freedom of the press. I'm happy to give Ernie Boch III the same rights as the New York Times. Okay, bad example. Make that the same rights as a trusted journalist. Discovering the identity of anonymous bloggers may be considered bad form in the blogosphere, but it's certainly not a threat to free speech. They have a right to shout from behind the curtain, and I have a right to peak behind the curtain. Why should my rights yield to the anonymous blogger? Privacy? Certainly not. You can't walk through a public park and then forbid everyone else from looking at you.

I respect the right of people to withhold their identity when they post their opinions online. But I discount what they say somewhat because of it. If I don't know where they are coming from, and what biases and allegiances they bring to the table, I trust them less. I've chosen to put my name under all of my online activities, whether it be here, at Red Hampshire, Facebook, or rarely in the comment threads of other blogs. My history and biases are there for Google and all the world to see, and I think it makes my words more credible. But that's my choice.

The source of the $2,000 reward is the anonymous blogger's use of another man's name. Ernie Boch Jr. doesn't like that someone is his name to push ideas he disagrees with. He's got every right to be upset. It's a slimy thing to do, but certainly not illegal. If Boch or Carr were going to court to make the blogger's identity public or make him change his nom-de-blog, I'd side with JimC on this.

Ironically, this issue started when Ernie Boch III called for a boycott of Carr's advertisers because he doesn't like what Carr is saying. By JimC's logic, this is a greater threat to press freedom than Carr's $2,000 reward. Of course, it's not. As always, the cure for bad speech is more speech.

View My Stats