Taoareyou's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
from the no,-really,-tao-are-you? dept
This week's favorites come from the wonderfully named taoareyou.
While I read almost every post from this blog, the ones that really catch my eye are those involving U.S civil liberties (because I live here, not that I don't take interest in the plight of others). Posts pointing out where government policy and corporate demands are chipping away at our personal freedoms not only expose the erosion of the Constitution in the name of profits and control, but also provide a platform to educate some people about what their rights truly are. That being said, I would like to thank Mike for giving me the opportunity to name my favorite posts from this week.
When Missouri passed a law to ban teachers from having students as friends on social networks, I was disappointed. It meant to me that a significant number of citizens in that state desired to restrict speech for the protection of children despite any evidence that such a restriction would have any effect whatsoever. If a teacher is going to have a secret relationship with a student, they will make a separate account on whatever social networks they want and not be affected at all. The law only prohibited legitimate communications between teachers and students. Giving students additional access to teachers is a good thing. I was pleased to learn the courts blocked the implementation of this law. This gives me hope that such restrictions will not spread to other states or increase in scope (such as a ban on clergy being friends with children in their parishes).
Another topic that troubles me is police arresting people for filming them. Citizens on public property openly recording public employees (really anyone, but especially public employees) are not only within their rights, but their actions can only help police operating within the law. Every video recording made of an arrest could be used as evidence to support an officer if someone were to claim misconduct. I would think an honest officer would be more than happy to be filmed doing their job and doing it well. In fact, such officers have been filmed and they illustrate this point perfectly. Yet there has been a disturbing trend for some law enforcement officers to abuse their authority and to violate the civil rights of citizens by misrepresenting wiretapping and other laws. These are not hidden cameras and the citizens do not conceal the fact that they are openly recording. The major media outlets have been doing video and sound recording on the street for years, often observing law enforcement at the scenes of accidents and crimes. Why is it suddenly a crime for a free citizen to do the same? I was again pleased when I heard an appeals court found the arrest and seizure of property in these cases to be a violation of 1st and 4th amendment rights. I truly hope this is the beginning of the end of this practice.
Finally, a topic I've been following with extreme interest is the ongoing domain seizures by the U.S. government. I'm not a legal expert by any means, which is probably why I cannot fathom how the DOJ can justify these obvious (to me) violations. What saddens me even more is that so many are just rolling over and accepting this without question. The ongoing efforts of Puerto 80 to challenge this police state style activity give me hope that this too will be stopped. If it remains unchecked, there is no reason why they will stop with domains. Could the government take whatever property of yours they want and call it forfeiture, not seizure? Even without charging you with any crimes? That's happening right now.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: obligation of police officer.
The accuser stands to profit from this in many ways: increased publicity, increased site traffic, opportunity to generate book sales, etc. etc. She has not shown any evidence (beyond her unverified public accusation) that she was raped. She benefits from this, the person she falsely accused is injured./div>
Re: Re: Re: obligation of police officer.
So if a woman does not call the police but instead chooses to call you a rapist, she doesn't need to file rape charges and you must accept being called a rapist? That's what happened here. Do you support this?
Let me give you a hint the police very rarely take the TSA officer off to jail
Why? Is it because of some great conspiracy between all local law enforcement and the TSA? Or maybe it's because there was no evidence of a crime?
Go do some reasearch and then come back and chat.
Do you find dismissing anyone who disagrees with you makes you feel like your points are more informed? Let's see.
According to the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network
http://www.rainn.org/statistics
In the US there are 213,000 sexual assaults a year.
60% are not reported, so that leave 85,000 reports of sexual assault every year.
2/3rd of those assault are committed by friends, family or other people they know.
So if a TSA agent sexually assaults you, what can you do? Read these:
http://www.tsagoons.com/2011/04/20/tsa-agent-charged-with-sexual-assault/
http://www.ne wworldorderwar.com/tag/tsa-agent-charged-with-6-counts-of-lewd-acts-with-a-child/
http://www.theg atewaypundit.com/2010/11/tsa-agent-arrested-on-sexual-assault-rape-charges-video/
These are just three examples I found. I have no doubt there are more. You see. When you are raped or assaulted, you call the police. You press charges. Anyone who tell you that cannot be done is just full of crap.
You choose to defend a woman who has publicly slandered a TSA agent without attempting to file charges. She could have. Absolutely she could have and to say otherwise is to be uninformed.
No you would rather stand beside her unsubstantiated claims because other TSA people are bad. And um, searches yeah these searches are all across the board sexual assault but we cannot charge the TSA with assault see...no don't read those examples of TSA agents being brought up on charges!! That couldn't happen!! No, we must just believe this woman and permit her actions because we are mindless zombies who don't think for ourselves and just make snarky, ignorant comments and then feel good about ourselves for standing up for this victim.
All the while victimizing another citizen.
/golfclap
Seriously, I give up on you guys./div>
Re: Re: Re: Re: Using Techdirt Logic Applied here
Could you give me a specific link where a person was arrested specifically for not agreeing to be searched? Not an arrest where they become belligerent and have to be removed. One where they were charged with not submitting to the search.
Thank you. Your Google search link didn't provide any actual facts. :)/div>
Re: Re: Using Techdirt Logic Applied here
Really? I'm not going to take you to court. I am just going to accuse you of infringement. Where are you going to prove me wrong? On your blog? are you going to call the thousands of people (and all the others in the future that read my blog) and show them the proof?
You wouldn't possibly consider taking me to court would you? You would not ask that I take down my slander would you? After all, I have freedom of speech and can say you committed a crime and you should have no recourse.
Good luck with that. It won't matter a bit if you are innocent and you can prove it if I don't take you to court and you aren't allowed to sue me for defamation./div>
Re:
If I go to the airport, and they tell me, I must be searched in order to fly, I turn away and leave. There is no threat of physical harm or arrest. There is no duress. Sure, I want to fly and I want not to be searched. But the fact is that is currently not an option.
If I say, fine you can search me. I have consented. The TSA agent is not doing this because they are a sexual predator hiding behind regulations. It's because that is what they have been trained to do in their search for weapons. This is not sexual assault. It is an illegal search, but not an assault.
For example, a body cavity search is drastically more invasive than the TSA searches.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_cavity_search
However they are NOT deemed sexual assault. They are not performed to give pleasure for being in a position of power or for sexual gratification. They are to find illegal substances and weapons.
The TSA searches are invasive and a violation of our 4th amendment rights, but they are not sexual assault.
If the TSA agent forced her fingers into the woman's vagina then the woman should have called the police. It is not the policy of the TSA to sexually assault people no matter how many times you chant otherwise.
The bottom line is the woman agreed to be searched. She allowed the search to continue when she could have stopped it. She declared she was raped but took no legal action, nor attempted to file charges, call the police, etc.
You rally around a false sexual assault charge. Seriously. How many patdowns have happened in the US now? How many sexual assault charges have been filed? How many sexual assault charges have been prosecuted?
Why don't you just make up some other bogus charges? Battery? Attempted murder? Kidnapping? Extortion? Why stop at rape? If the blogger can make accusations without worry that she has to back them up in court, might as well make a whole bunch of them./div>
Re: Re: Using Techdirt Logic Applied here
Citation needed. I have not seen any TSA policy authorizing sexual assault. In my opinion this is an illegal search, and also one you can refuse to consent to. Nobody has presented evidence that anyone has ever been held down and searched against their will or arrested for not consenting to being searched.
Your claim that sexually assaulting people is policy is simply an outright falsehood. It's an attempt to characterize a a search as a sexual act. These TSA agents, despite what you want to believe, are not doing this for sexual reasons. And they are only touching those who consent to the search.
It harms the fight for civil rights to try and sensationalize the searches as sexual assaults. It detracts from the truth, that they are illegal searches by focusing on a lie.
In prisons, there are much more intrusive searches. Those are not sexual assault either. Nobody characterizes them as such. Body cavity searches are not sexual assaults either. The TSA searches are not sexual assaults. They are illegal searches. Focus on the truth. Trying to make it into something it's not just for the emotional pull will fail in the end, and the position against the searches will be weaker for it./div>
Re: Re: Re: Anybody see the bottom...
She asked one lawyer his opinion. When that didn't work, she decided to slander the agent./div>
Re: obligation of police officer.
Your psychic abilities combined with your conspiracy theories that the entire government is filled with evil people who want to oppress their fellow citizens have determined this.
I know one thing that is fact. If you do not call the police, they will not come to take your report. That is what happened here. Nothing more. No conspiracy between the TSA and the local police and prosecutor. Ms. Aklon simply did not bother to file charges. Although she claims she was raped, she was too busy with her travel plans to call the police.
Hey, I dunno, do most women who are raped at an airport just go on with their plans, attend a conference and later on call a lawyer instead of the police? Why bother calling the police anyway. There is a chance it will be proven your accusation is false. Why risk that when you can just declare the rape happened with no need to prove it? Much easier./div>
Using Techdirt Logic Applied here
TSA worker accused of rape.
TSA worker must be guilty because other TSA agents have been abusive.
File sharer uses bittorrent.
File sharer is accused of infringement.
Since other torrents have infringing content, ALL Torrents have infringing content and therefore, since you used a torrent, you must be infringing.
In fact, we say you are infringing and will contact your place of work and let them know you have been illegally downloading copyrighted materials. We will publish your name on our website. We will spread the word so all potential employers in the future will know you are guilty of infringement.
You can do nothing. We do not have to prove our claims. You used a torrent, you are assumed guilty. Tough luck. You should have known better than to use a torrent./div>
Re: Re: Evidence of Defamation
Right. Are you also willing to believe every man accused of rape is also guilty because of the testimonials of THOUSANDS of women who have been raped by men? Thousands of women have been raped by men. Therefore all men accused of rape are guilty.
I can't find hundreds of rape accusations against TSA agents. But hey, this TSA agent MUST be a rapist because you don't like the TSA and you have heard bad things about other TSA agents. So ALL TSA agents must be guilty of whatever unproven accusations are hurled at them.
[Sarcasm for effect to follow, don't prove yourself to be an idiot and believe what follows to be my opinion]
Serves the bitch right for taking a government job instead of getting on welfare. Right? We will teach those TSA bastards! Let's defame the citizens that are employed by the TSA! Hell yeah! It doesn't matter what that sorry ass woman's rights are! We gotta take a stand! Since you didn't quit your job, you're a rapist! TAKE THAT!!
By taking away the rights of TSA workers we are standing up for the rights of our citizens!!!!
Oh shit. Those TSA workers are citizens...crap. We just took away our own rights too. Goddammit.
/sarcasm
Your logic really sucks./div>
Re: Re: Re: Evidence of Defamation
I am no longer surprised that we are losing our rights. It's not because some powerful shadow government force is taking them from us. It's because we are just throwing them away./div>
Re: Re: Re: This is about the first amendment, not rape laws
She is claiming defamation. This is a legal response to the accusation. In fact it is the ONLY way she can legally respond because her accuser did not file charges against her. A defamation claim is saying that Thedala Magee is calling Ms. Alkon a liar. She disputes the claim that she raped Ms. Alkon./div>
Evidence of Defamation
Google Julian Assange rape. You will find articles saying rape claims, accused of rape, and questioning the charges of rape as an anti-wikileaks plot.
By reading articles on the Net, a LOT of people question the rape charges against Assange yet Thedala Magee is assumed to be guilty.
You don't like the actions of the TSA. Many people don't, including me. That doesn't mean that Thedala Magee, because she works for the TSA, can automatically be assumed guilty of rape just because she is accused.
I don't know that she isn't guilty. But until she is convicted of rape charges in court, I will assume she is innocent and will not proclaim she is a rapist. I do the same for Assange. I do the same for anyone where I do not have personal knowledge of the events.
However the actions of Ms.Alkon are defamatory. Thedala Magee's name has been now smeared worldwide. The story has been picked up by major websites such as Forbes. The lawyer for Thedala Magee will have thousands of pages of evidence showing posts where people, based on the unproven claims of Ms. Alkon, believe her to be a rapist.
There is a HUGE double standard here because of the bias against the TSA. If you choose not to see it because you want to accept Ms.Alkon's account as absolute fact without the slightest need for evidence or prosecution, then you too are evidence that defamation has in fact occurred./div>
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technical definition
Re: Re: Re: Anybody see the bottom...
Failure to legally prosecute a crime is NOT justification for slander. Don't let your emotions and desire to believe the accusation convince you to ignore the rights of another.
If a woman publishes in a column that you raped her and people read that, they are going to think of you exactly the way you are thinking of the TSA agent. They are going to believe the woman. It will affect your life in a very negative way.
If you didn't rape her, what do you do?
You file defamation charges./div>
Re: Re: Re: Anybody see the bottom...
If the prosecutor, and every lawyer you contact refuses, then you might consider that your accusation has no merit, if not one single person, seeing what you presented, feels it is actionable.
If this occurs, you are not suddenly given the legal right to claim you were raped anyway and name that person publicly. They were not found guilty, and the truth is, nobody you went to believed you had enough evidence to prove rape in the first place.
When you declare someone committed a crime that they did not commit (legally, not just in your mind), that my friend, in California, where this happened...is defamation./div>
Re: This is about the first amendment, not rape laws
In this case, she is claiming she was sexually raped when she has not presented any evidence to that fact and never even attempted to file charges or even contact the police.
When the TSA agent contacted a lawyer, and they decided to file defamation charges, that is a legal response to Ms.Alkon's accusation. And that response is, you are lying.
It will be up to Ms. Alkon to prove she was raped for her statement to be true. She can't say, well I feel like I was raped. That is not what her blog says or what she has been telling people or what she screamed out at the airport before going on with her plans./div>
Re: Re: Re: Re: Defense is Grasping
She was in LA.
Upon leaving, still sobbing, I yelled to the woman, "YOU RAPED ME." And I took her name to see if I could file sexual assault charges on my return.
She boarded her plane, flew to Birmingham, the from there went to New York. She attended a conference. She came back home. She called a single lawyer who wouldn't take her case.
Not once does she say she tried to call the police. Not once did she say she attempted to file charges and the police said no, you cannot.
No, you aren't interested in the facts. Like so many people reading this, you just want to believe the defamatory accusations of Ms. Alkon. Who is a syndicated columnist, author, and blogger. I don't know how many readers she has, but I'm sure their reactions are similar to those here.
People read her blog and believe that she was sexually raped by the TSA agent. This is an unproven accusation and is therefore false. Ms. Alkon made NO attempt to file charges.
Wake up. Don't let others think for you./div>
Re: Re: Defense is Grasping
This is not something that could be interpreted as a euphemism for being groped. When you tell someone that you were raped it doesn't leave people speculating as to what happened. It is a serious accusation for a serious crime. In fact, aside from murder it's probably one of the most horrible acts that one human can impose on another.
Because of this, the effect of being accused of rape is paramount and rightly so...IF you are guilty of rape.
The problem with this case is the woman made NO effort to file charges. The woman simply took her name, screamed YOU RAPED ME and went on about her business. She contacted one lawyer, who didn't feel she had a case.
She then took it upon herself to name the TSA agent and make public statements that she was raped by the agent. She did this verbally and in writing.
Again, this wasn't some metaphor or a statement of opinion such as "I felt as if I was raped". It was a very clear and distinct accusation of a crime. The proper course was to file criminal charges. THIS is how you legally accuse someone of a crime. NOT in a blog.
The TSA Agent's name is being associated with rape despite no rape conviction OR EVEN LEGAL CHARGES of rape.
You believe she should be denied the right to have this cleared. You choose to ignore defamation laws that specifically address false accusations of crimes. You wish for the TSA Agent to have no rights to defend herself simply because you wish to believe the accusations against her.
Will this come to pass? I truly hope not. And when it comes to the time that you get falsely accused of a crime you didn't commit, I will stand for your rights to defend against defamation as well./div>
Re: Re: Re:
If someone starts telling the world I am a rapist, and I have not even been charged with rape, then my proof of defamation is I have not been convicted of rape. I do not have the burden of proof upon me to prove the statement that I am a rapist is in fact not true.
The person calling me a rapist has to prove that I am if they want their claim to be true and thus not defamatory.
That would require filing rape charges against me, presenting the evidence and winning a conviction./div>
More comments from taoareyou >>
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by taoareyou.
Submit a story now.
Tools & Services
TwitterFacebook
RSS
Podcast
Research & Reports
Company
About UsAdvertising Policies
Privacy
Contact
Help & FeedbackMedia Kit
Sponsor/Advertise
Submit a Story
More
Copia InstituteInsider Shop
Support Techdirt