Slashdot Mirror
UK Pressures the US To Takedown Extremist Videos
chrb writes "BBC News and the Telegraph are reporting that the British government has pressured the US government to take down privately hosted extremist web sites and videos, particularly on YouTube. The request follows the conviction of a 21-year-old woman who attempted to murder MP Stephen Timms after watching YouTube videos of radical American Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki. YouTube hosts more than 5,000 videos featuring al-Awlaki, but has begun to remove them following the British government's complaints. The issue obviously raises First Amendment issues in the US, but Security minister Baroness Neville-Jones has said 'Those websites would categorically not be allowed in the UK. They incite cold-blooded murder and as such are surely contrary to the public good. If they were hosted in the UK then we would take them down but this is a global problem. Many of these websites are hosted in America and we look forward to working even more closely with you to take down this hateful material.'"
We have freedom of speech. The UK is just going to have to deal with it.
Let's examine this list shall we? "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or the press". So the US government has no authority to limit what we say or publish. States may or may not be able to limit speech, depending on their constitutions, but we're mainly focused on the National government for this topic.
>>> Obscenity
You are free to say any obscenity you wish. The only exception is on broadcast TV or radio, but you're free to say it online, on cable, in books, in person, and so on.
>>> Fighting words
>>> Incitement to imminent lawless action
>>> True threats
>>> Blackmail
The Supreme Court made several rulings in the volatile 60s and 70s that fighting words ARE protected speech, because "sometimes in the volatile arena of protest, people say things in anger [such as death threats] but without intent to act." They then concluded only the ACT is prosecutable, or if a clear-and-present threat exists (such as a gun), but otherwise the words are protected. i.e. If you are unarmed you can say anything you want.
>>> Defamation (includes libel, slander)
That's not illegal at the US level... only the state level... therefore not relevant to the UK-US topic.
>>> Child pornography
Child porn is not illegal; the Sex Act is illegal, because it's statutory rape, and the image is connected to that. Also child nudity is protected speech, which is why nudist websites are allowed to exist online. Many assume a photo of a nude child is a crime but it's perfectly legal.
>>> Perjury
That's because you swore an oath not to lie. If you do not swear the oath, you are free to perjure all you wish.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Glen Greenwald is apparently an idiot. He conveniently forgets that we've gone to war on behalf of Muslims, and that Muslim factions are engaged in war around the globe against various other nations. If you find his explanation satisfying, you seriously don't understand the situation.