Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dispute Simmers Over Web Site Posting Personal Data on Police
NY Times ^ | July 12, 2003 | ADAM LIPTAK

Posted on 07/11/2003 8:09:36 PM PDT by jern

Dispute Simmers Over Web Site Posting Personal Data on Police By ADAM LIPTAK

illiam Sheehan does not like the police. He expresses his views about what he calls police corruption in Washington State on his Web site, where he also posts lists of police officers' addresses, home phone numbers and Social Security numbers.

State officials say those postings expose officers and their families to danger and invite identity theft. But neither litigation nor legislation has stopped Mr. Sheehan, who promises to expand his site to include every police and corrections officer in the state by the end of the year.

Mr. Sheehan says he obtains the information lawfully, from voter registration, property, motor vehicle and other official records. But his provocative use of personal data raises questions about how the law should address the dissemination of accurate, publicly available information that is selected and made accessible in a way that may facilitate the invasion of privacy, computer crime, even violence.

Larry Erickson, executive director of the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs, says the organization's members are disturbed by Mr. Sheehan's site.

"Police officers go out at night," Mr. Erickson said, "they make people mad, and they leave their families behind."

The law generally draws no distinction between information that is nominally public but hard to obtain and information that can be fetched with an Internet search engine and a few keystrokes. The dispute over Mr. Sheehan's site is similar to a debate that has been heatedly taken up around the nation, about whether court records that are public in paper form should be freely available on the Internet.

In 1989, in a case not involving computer technology, the Supreme Court did allow the government to refuse journalists' Freedom of Information Act request for paper copies of information it had compiled from arrest and conviction records available in scattered public files. The court cited the "practical obscurity" of the original records.

But once accurate information is in private hands like Mr. Sheehan's, the courts have been extremely reluctant to interfere with its dissemination.

Mr. Sheehan, a 41-year-old computer engineer in Mill Creek, Wash., near Seattle, says his postings hold the police accountable, by facilitating picketing, the serving of legal papers and research into officers' criminal histories. His site collects news articles and court papers about what he describes as inadequate and insincere police investigations, and about police officers who have themselves run afoul of the law.

His low opinion of the police has its roots, Mr. Sheehan says, in a 1998 dispute with the Police Department of Kirkland, Wash., over whether he lied in providing an alibi for a friend charged with domestic violence. Mr. Sheehan was found guilty of making a false statement and harassing a police officer and was sentenced to six months in jail, but served no time: the convictions were overturned.

He started his Web site in the spring of 2001. There are other sites focused on accusations of police abuse, he said, "but they stop short of listing addresses."

Yet if his site goes farther than others, Mr. Sheehan says, still it is not too far. "There is not a single incident," he said, "where a police officer has been harassed as a result of police-officer information being on the Internet."

Last year, in response to a complaint by the Kirkland police about Mr. Sheehan's site, the Washington Legislature enacted a law prohibiting the dissemination of the home addresses, phone numbers, birth dates and Social Security numbers of law enforcement, corrections and court personnel if it was meant "to harm or intimidate."

As a result, Mr. Sheehan, who had taken delight in bringing his project to the attention of local police departments, removed those pieces of information from his site. But he put them back in May, when a federal judge, deciding on a challenge brought by Mr. Sheehan himself, struck down the law as unconstitutional.

The ruling, by John C. Coughenour, chief judge of the Federal District Court in Seattle, said Mr. Sheehan's site was "analytically indistinguishable from a newspaper."

"There is cause for concern," Judge Coughenour wrote, "when the Legislature enacts a statute proscribing a type of political speech in a concerted effort to silence particular speakers."

The state government, he continued, "boldly asserts the broad right to outlaw any speech — whether it be anti-Semitic, anti-choice, radical religious, or critical of police — so long as a jury of one's peers concludes that the speaker subjectively intends to intimidate others with that speech."

Bruce E. H. Johnson, a Seattle lawyer specializing in First Amendment issues, said Judge Coughenour was correct in striking down the statute because it treated identical publicly available information differently depending on the authorities' perception of the intent of the person who disseminated it.

"It forces local prosecutors to become thought police," Mr. Johnson said.

Elena Garella, Mr. Sheehan's lawyer, said there was one principle at the heart of the case.

"Once the cat is out of the bag," she said, "the government has no business censoring information or punishing people who disseminate it."

Fred Olson, a spokesman for the state attorney general, Christine O. Gregoire, said the state would not appeal Judge Coughenour's decision.

"Our attorneys reviewed the decision and the case law," Mr. Olson said, "and they just felt there was very, very little likelihood that we would prevail on appeal. Our resources are much better used to find a legislative solution."

But Bill Finkbeiner, a state senator who was the main sponsor of the law that was struck down, said the judge's opinion left little room for a legislative repair. He said he was frustrated.

"This isn't just bad for police officers and corrections employees," Mr. Finkbeiner said. "It really doesn't bode well for anybody. Access to personal information changes when that information is put in electronic form."

Mr. Sheehan says one sort of data he has posted has given him pause.

"I'll be honest and say I do have a quandary over the Social Security numbers," he said. "I'm going to publish them because that's how I got the rest of my information, and I want to let people verify my data. But our state government shouldn't be releasing that data."

Lt. Rex Caldwell, a spokesman for the Police Department in Kirkland, said his colleagues there were resigned to Mr. Sheehan's site, and added that much of the information posted on it was out of date.

When the matter first came up, "people were extremely unhappy about it," Lieutenant Caldwell said. "Now it's more of an annoyance than anything else. The official line from the chief is that we're still concerned. At the same time, everyone's greatest fear, of people using this to track them down, has not materialized."

Nor is there any indication that the site has led to identity theft, he said.

Brightening, Lieutenant Caldwell said some officers even welcomed the posting of their home addresses, if that encouraged Mr. Sheehan to visit.

"If he wants to drop by the house," Lieutenant Caldwell said, "the police officers would be more than happy to welcome him. We're all armed and trained."


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Front Page News; News/Current Events; US: Washington
KEYWORDS: privacy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-321 next last

1 posted on 07/11/2003 8:09:36 PM PDT by jern
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: jern
"If he wants to drop by the house," Lieutenant Caldwell said, "the police officers would be more than happy to welcome him. We're all armed and trained."

Sounds like a threat.

2 posted on 07/11/2003 8:16:27 PM PDT by Sir Gawain (My other tagline is a Porsche)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

GOD BLESS OUR MILITARY
AND
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Keep Our Republic Free

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

or you can use

PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com


STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER
It's on the Breaking News Sidebar



3 posted on 07/11/2003 8:17:35 PM PDT by Support Free Republic (Your support keeps Free Republic going strong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #4 Removed by Moderator

To: jern
As a police officer's wife, I don't even want to think about what could happen to these officers and there families. Should someone get this personal information and bring harm to any of these officer's or there families, I would hold this guy accountable!

I know of one incident when my hubby thought someone was following him home from work one night.....of course he wouldn't come straight home and was unable to get any information on the vehicle or the person who was driving it. If the public only knew how many times people have called up police departments to threaten the lives of police officers.
5 posted on 07/11/2003 8:23:05 PM PDT by Arpege92
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Support Free Republic
"I'll be honest and say I do have a quandary over the Social Security numbers," he said. "I'm going to publish them because that's how I got the rest of my information, and I want to let people verify my data. But our state government shouldn't be releasing that data."

Ouch. This could be interesting.

This guy is going to get someone hurt. How could it be that easy to post someones SSN. Amazing.
6 posted on 07/11/2003 8:24:18 PM PDT by Stew Padasso (Smoke Banshees BHD - libertyteeth.com - Puff Puff Ping!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Stew Padasso
In the State of Washington you are REQUIRED to GIVE your Soc Sec # when....you get a Drivers License, a Fishing or Hunting License, and a trade license....
7 posted on 07/11/2003 8:35:16 PM PDT by goodnesswins (Become a monthly donor.....it's easy....it's so simple, it's elementary....am I getting redundant?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Sir Gawain
It is a threat.

I'm a cop and I have been threatened by people that would curl your hair. I tell them if they want me, they can find me at work.

I also tell them if they screw with my family I will kill them. No questions asked.

Perhaps Mr. Internet Freedom should put that particular disclaimer on his website.
8 posted on 07/11/2003 9:01:47 PM PDT by JBBooks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jern


9 posted on 07/11/2003 9:07:06 PM PDT by Hal1950
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jern
When is he going to post information on the judges?
10 posted on 07/11/2003 9:10:49 PM PDT by ikka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JBBooks
It is a threat.

So it's ok for cops to threaten people?

11 posted on 07/11/2003 9:13:09 PM PDT by Sir Gawain (My other tagline is a Porsche)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: JBBooks
There is not a single incident," he said, "where a police officer has been harassed as a result of police-officer information being on the Internet."

Probably because hardly anybody is looking at it...but it only takes one kook to harrass some cop's wife or meddle with his SS#, and there will be hell to pay.

12 posted on 07/11/2003 9:14:00 PM PDT by wimpycat (I'm an expert at being annoying. I'm a kid sister.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Arpege92
Or how many times in a day/week/month/year police officers have their lives threatened or right on the line. This seemingly acceptance of police bashing in society and especially on this site disgusts me.

All my respect to you for being the wife of an officer and to your husband for the tough job he does.
13 posted on 07/11/2003 9:15:58 PM PDT by Brytani (Politics: n. from Greek; "poli"-many; "tics"-ugly, bloodsucking parasites.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Sir Gawain
Have someone put my family at risk by posting personal, detailed information about me on the internet and I'd make more then a threat.
14 posted on 07/11/2003 9:19:25 PM PDT by Brytani (Politics: n. from Greek; "poli"-many; "tics"-ugly, bloodsucking parasites.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: JBBooks
I agree with you. If someone has a gripe, the most they should do is put the officer's name and where he works on the net. Leave wives and kids out of this.
15 posted on 07/11/2003 9:19:45 PM PDT by ampat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Brytani
This seemingly acceptance of police bashing in society and especially on this site disgusts me.

Maybe if more police refused to participate in illegal, un-constitutional checkpoints and taxation disguised as traffic ticketing, there would be less criticism.

Many officers have forgotten that they are "peace officers" and are there to peacefully take care of things. Many officers no longer consider themselves "civilians" and instead are SWAT-team wannabes.

16 posted on 07/11/2003 9:22:03 PM PDT by ikka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

Comment #17 Removed by Moderator

To: Brytani
The information is public domain. Anyone can get it. Are you threatening the entire public if they look up your address?
18 posted on 07/11/2003 9:24:26 PM PDT by Sir Gawain (My other tagline is a Porsche)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: jern
I think perhaps the newspaper article should print Mr. Sheehan's address, phone number, and social security number as well. I'm quite certain he has no problem with that.
19 posted on 07/11/2003 9:24:40 PM PDT by Freedom4US
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jern
Its not just the kook 5150's anymore, with the new surge of radical socialist movements in every town, cops have enough work while on their watch without having one of these torch happy enviros looking for their address!
20 posted on 07/11/2003 9:24:59 PM PDT by jdontom (BacktheBadge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JBBooks
It is a threat.

I'm a cop and I have been threatened by people that would curl your hair. I tell them if they want me, they can find me at work.

I also tell them if they screw with my family I will kill them. No questions asked.

Perhaps Mr. Internet Freedom should put that particular disclaimer on his website.

//////////
So, as a peace officer, you are entitle to issue threats? Hmmm.
21 posted on 07/11/2003 9:26:01 PM PDT by BenR2 ((John 3:16: Still True Today.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: BenR2
entitle = entitled
22 posted on 07/11/2003 9:26:19 PM PDT by BenR2 ((John 3:16: Still True Today.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Sir Gawain
I've always thought that if we expose public servants and elected officials to the type of open information that they require of us sheeple, then they'd be more accountable.
23 posted on 07/11/2003 9:28:56 PM PDT by Fred Mertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ikka
They are "law enforcement" officers.
24 posted on 07/11/2003 9:29:51 PM PDT by wimpycat (I'm an expert at being annoying. I'm a kid sister.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: BenR2
Law enforcement officer.
25 posted on 07/11/2003 9:30:22 PM PDT by wimpycat (I'm an expert at being annoying. I'm a kid sister.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Brytani
But you have to remember. To so many on these threads police officers:

1) Have no rights, and

2) Are nothing more then jackbooted thugs.

All you need to do is check out the threads whenever a police officer is killed in the line of duty. You will see scores of posts immediately:

1) Defending the person who murdered the officer, and

2) Placing the blame on the police (and invoking Waco, Ruby Ridge and anything else they can think of) regardless of circumstances (it's always the jackbooted thugs fault).

Just so you know some of the folks you're dealing with.

26 posted on 07/11/2003 9:32:32 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Brytani; Sir Gawain; JBBooks
First, I didn't see JB say that the site should come down. Which if that's how he feels it's extremely commendable given his occupation.

I believe in equal justice under the law. If we can't look up the cop's asses they shouldn't be able to look up our any time they want. If they can look up ours any time they want we should be able to do the same.

They're info is no safer with us than ours is with them.

27 posted on 07/11/2003 9:33:51 PM PDT by AAABEST
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
Yeah, a bunch of kooks and crackpots.
28 posted on 07/11/2003 9:34:05 PM PDT by wimpycat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: JBBooks
Perhaps Mr. Internet Freedom should put that particular disclaimer on his website.

or perhaps you should inform Mr. Internet Freedom about the privacy act of 1974. Originally passed to prevent the type of abuse that happened during the Nixon adminstration, it is largely ignored now. Clinton got a free pass with 900 FBI files. It is still the law and any piece of personal information associated with your SSN is covered in the act. You will get a copy of the law at the top of the list in a Goggle search, by typing Privacy act of 1974.

BTW it only applies to government employees. Half or better of the agencies in the U.S. are in some kind of violation. A criminal complaint filed with a U.S. court would really open a can of worms.

29 posted on 07/11/2003 9:34:58 PM PDT by SSN558 (Be on the lookout for Black White-Supremacists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Brytani
"Have someone put my family at risk by posting personal, detailed information about me on the internet and I'd make more then a threat."

I find it more than a little disconcerting that anybody can go to google and type in a phone number and immediately get a name and street address for that number. Most people wouldn't abuse it, but for the criminal, it could be a gold mine.

30 posted on 07/11/2003 9:35:46 PM PDT by sweetliberty ("Having the right to do a thing is not at all the same thing as being right in doing it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Sir Gawain
I wonder what would happen if he did the same with the identities of IRS and BATF agents.
31 posted on 07/11/2003 9:36:56 PM PDT by SauronOfMordor (Java/C++/Unix/Web Developer looking for next gig)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sweetliberty
"I find it more than a little disconcerting that anybody can go to google and type in a phone number and immediately get a name and street address for that number."

I was to until my wife pointed out that it doesn't work if your number is unlisted. The only thing you get from google is the exact same thing similarly available from the phone book.

In this particular case, the information being posted is NOT always listed in the phone book.

32 posted on 07/11/2003 9:38:00 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: SauronOfMordor
His house would magically burn down.
33 posted on 07/11/2003 9:38:18 PM PDT by Sir Gawain (My other tagline is a Porsche)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
What's so special about cops? Or firemen? Or elected officials?
34 posted on 07/11/2003 9:40:23 PM PDT by Fred Mertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: SauronOfMordor
That's a GREAT IDEA!
35 posted on 07/11/2003 9:40:23 PM PDT by AAABEST
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Sir Gawain
Yeah really, what is it with ATF and other paramilitary types and fire?

It's as if they come from hell.

36 posted on 07/11/2003 9:42:27 PM PDT by AAABEST
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
I've been around FR long enough to know there is a small but vocal group of posters on here who cheer at the thought of a cop "getting what they deserve".

Although, I'd venture a guess, if their lives or family was in trouble, the same cops they love to hate would be the first ones they would count on to protect their sorry rear ends. As I said in a previous post, the cop bashing that goes on in here disgusts me.
37 posted on 07/11/2003 9:43:53 PM PDT by Brytani (Politics: n. from Greek; "poli"-many; "tics"-ugly, bloodsucking parasites.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Fred Mertz
Why nothing Fred...they're just jackbooted thugs who harrass innocent people like you.
38 posted on 07/11/2003 9:44:08 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Brytani
But some of our companions just love to wallow in that digust...just look at them here and on the ongoing Woodring threads.
39 posted on 07/11/2003 9:45:21 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: ikka
Cops have no choice but to follow the laws as enacted by their respective state representatives or the people who vote those laws by virtue of ballot measure.

Or in your world would you like to see the police themselves making up the laws as they see fit?

Does the term "law enforcement officer" ring any bells?
40 posted on 07/11/2003 9:46:04 PM PDT by Brytani (Politics: n. from Greek; "poli"-many; "tics"-ugly, bloodsucking parasites.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: AAABEST
There is a reason why a cop can look "up your ass" and they need to be protected from those who would do them harm. I'd give you a description of the job a cop does, however I believe it should have been covered in kindergarten.
41 posted on 07/11/2003 9:46:22 PM PDT by Brytani (Politics: n. from Greek; "poli"-many; "tics"-ugly, bloodsucking parasites.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
Well, I did wonder about the unlisted thing. I have had an unlisted/unpublished number for years. The number I have now I have only had about 8 months, so when I type it in it comes up with the previous user's information. I didn't know if the error was due to the newness of the number or the fact that it was unlisted. Either way, it was a relief to me to find that because I had received a nasty phone call from some guy and I hung up on him. He called back making threats and saying he knew where I lived. I knew it wasn't anybody that I knew but it was very unnerving to realize that it was, and is, possible for a wrong number to turn out badly if you have someone with a few screws loose that happens to know how to use a computer.
42 posted on 07/11/2003 9:47:58 PM PDT by sweetliberty ("Having the right to do a thing is not at all the same thing as being right in doing it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Fred Mertz; Sir Gawain
The information is public domain. Anyone can get it. Are you threatening the entire public if they look up your address?

I've always thought that if we expose public servants and elected officials to the type of open information that they require of us sheeple, then they'd be more accountable.

You guys nailed it. Just about everyone else here misses the point entirely.

A lack of critical thinking and analysis is becoming a real problem aroung here.

43 posted on 07/11/2003 9:49:18 PM PDT by SC Swamp Fox (Aim small, miss small.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Brytani
This seemingly acceptance of police bashing in society and especially on this site disgusts me.

While posting home addresses and SS#'s is crossing the line, I have no problem with posting background info, especially if it includes criminal behavior.

My nephew was a rookie cop in CA and witnessed his fellow officers tossing small bombs or grenades (can't remember which) into groups of homeless people, then laughing when they fled for their lives. He also witnessed them beating hand-cuffed prisoners (usually black, while the officers were white). When he couldn't look the other way anymore, he reported it to internal affairs. As far as I know, nothing ever came of his accusations, but he was threatened, feared for his life, and ended up quitting the force and moving far away.

When the decent cops (and there are many) quit hiding behind the blue wall that makes them co-conspirators, and speak out against the bad cops in their ranks, then the public will have more confidence.

And since this rant is too long already, I won't even mention how the cops in my rural community routinely lie under oath in order to back up a fellow officer's statement.

44 posted on 07/11/2003 9:49:23 PM PDT by bjcintennessee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
I'm just glad the cop bashers are normally out posted by those of us who have respect for laws and those who enforce them.
45 posted on 07/11/2003 9:50:21 PM PDT by Brytani (Politics: n. from Greek; "poli"-many; "tics"-ugly, bloodsucking parasites.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Brytani
If even 1/10th of everything that the police are accused of were true, the website wouldn't be up today and Mr. Sheehan would have passed into history a long time ago.
46 posted on 07/11/2003 9:51:58 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: bjcintennessee
Yeap, all cops do is protect those in their ranks who break the laws, harrass innocent criminals and make life miserable for us poor folks under their boots.

As for posting information on a cop who has been convicted of breaking the law, fine the line however is crossed when the information on EVERY cop (as this webhost intends to do) is posted.
47 posted on 07/11/2003 9:53:29 PM PDT by Brytani (Politics: n. from Greek; "poli"-many; "tics"-ugly, bloodsucking parasites.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: jern
Interesting to think about....the government, whether it be local or federal, has no problems about compiling all kinds of data on us, so we should haven't any problems about compiling all kinds of data on them either..

If the government respected our privacy, I would say the guy needs to take the site down.

48 posted on 07/11/2003 9:53:35 PM PDT by af_vet_rr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bjcintennessee
..I won't even mention how the cops in my rural community routinely lie under oath in order to back up a fellow officer's statement.

They are trained to lie under oath on the stand. It brings in convictions and big buck fines.

49 posted on 07/11/2003 9:56:10 PM PDT by Fred Mertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Fred Mertz
What's so special about cops? Or firemen? Or elected officials?

Law Enforcement Officers and Firemen- put their lives on the line for us everyday when they go to work.

Elected Officials- Nothing that I am aware of.

50 posted on 07/11/2003 9:56:36 PM PDT by trussell (Small things occupy small minds. No wonder dems can play with themselves for hours.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-321 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson