Ron Paul: Highways claim more than 9/11 killed

Baltimore Sun ^ | 9/22/07 | Rick Pearson

[Dr. Frank fan]

P.S. Say you work in a photo-developing shop. The government approaches you with a warrant and says they need to access the negatives of such-and-such customer because they suspect him of a crime, and the negatives may prove this. You hand over the negatives, of course. They leave. (This is based on a real case, although in reality the photo employee is the one who approached the government, not vice versa.)

Question: Do you have the "right" to phone the customer and tip him off that the government did this? Is this an important First-Amendment "right" to you? Would you have thought highly of that photo clerk had he contacted Mr. DeGuzman? Would you have accepted a defense that said clerk had a "free speech right" to tell Mr. DeGuzman that the government was aware he was planning a massacre?

Or: You work for the phone company, and for this reason you learn that government has a warrant for a wiretap on their suspect, Customer X. Same question. "Hi, Customer X, I'm from the phone company and I just wanted you to know your phone is tapped".

The freedom to engage in this behavior is really an important "First Amendment right" to you?

[Dr. Frank fan]

Oops, see #401 meant for you.

P.P.S. And let's go further. What about spies? Are they not simply engaging in "free speech"? What was Aldrich Ames' crime, exactly? Speech, right? Talking about things that he knew, to others. But that's his First Amendment right!

Yet he's locked up!

Whither our Republic??

Free Aldrich Ames, the First Amendment martyr! That's what Jefferson would've said.

[skr]

Which part of comparing apples and oranges does this man not understand?