Skip to main content

View Diary: Lying Liars and the Freedom of Speech (34 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Beautiful analogy (0+ / 0-)

    Now throw the rest of our government back to the Middle Ages, or even the Renaissance, and see how it operates.

    And yeah, tell me that you can prove the intent to deceive on Galileo's part, given a modern legal defense.

    Your argument is comically bad.  Part of the success of modern government and justice is the system of checks and balances at all levels, the assumption of innocence, and high burden of proof.  There's also the recognition that scientific inquiry is different from reporting of news.

    Please stop playing stupid games with my ideas, both you and Will.  The sky doesn't fall when we make an attempt to impose some order on our discourse.

    •  If you're going to get all sensitive (0+ / 0-)

      I'll play in some other diary.

      Democratic Candidate for US Senator, Wisconsin, in 2012

      Abolish Mandatory Minimum Sentences. Don't wait 'til you're President.

      by ben masel on Tue Jul 31, 2007 at 04:57:25 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Ok, you don't like my examples (0+ / 0-)

      Can you give a list of a few 'facts' that are so clear that someone should be prohibited from saying anything different?

      Obviously they should be of significant interest, and not trivial things like 'the sun rises in the east' (or, to be more correct, appears to rise in the east).

      •  Sure, here you go (0+ / 0-)
        1. It was clear that we did not know where WMDs were located in Iraq before the invasion, even if we had what we thought were good guesses.  Those who knowingly misrepresented that point committed fraud on the body politic.

        That's significant enough that I won't take the time to put out a laundry list of other examples. I don't have them on hand, and it's not worth my time now (it's late night here in Denmark) to do a search.  But it's also quite irrelevant.  If someone knowingly says that, as a hypothetical, Monsanto's BGH is not linked to health problems, when the only available studies say it is, then that should be grounds for criminal action.  If no real examples come up, then Hallelujah!, you don't have any prosecutions to fret about, and we're all happy.

        Bedtime now,

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site