Wasn't Indymedia the one who posted the names, addresses and phone numbers of all the delegates to the RNC with specific threats and ideas of mayhem?
Yes, they were.
Naming RNC delegates
Indymedia has posted the names and addresses of lots of RNC delegates, which in turn has earned it an investigation by the Secret Service. As you might expect, the ACLU has jumped in to defend Indymedia, arguing that "This type of investigation is really a form of intimidation and a message to activists that they will pay a price for speaking out," said Ann Beeson, the ACLU's associate legal counsel. "The posting of publicly available information about people who are in the news should not trigger an investigation."
Fair enough. However, consider what it is that Indymedia -- at least, some posters there -- hoped to accomplish through this stunt:
There are several lists of Republican National Convention delegates posted on the Indymedia site, including one listing more than 2,000 of them. Included are names, home addresses, e-mail addresses and the New York-area hotels where many are staying.
"The delegates should know not only what people think of the platform they will ratify, but that they are not welcome in New York City," said one posting, first reported Monday by The New York Times.
Apart from the fact that the delegates, like all other persons in this country, have a right to visit New York City, I would think that simply joining the massive protests would be sufficient to express disagreement with the RNC and to let the delegates know that they are "not welcome." What else is to be gained by posting their home addresses and local hotel information? Could it be, oh, "really a form of intimidation and a message to [delegates] that they will pay a price for speaking out"?
I haven't kept up on the First Amendment cases, but this kind of reminds me of how some extreme pro-life groups put up websites with the pictures and home addresses of doctors who perform abortions. My recollection of that case was that the intent to intimidate was much more clear than in this case, so perhaps this can be distinguished on a factual basis. But it seems to me a similar sort of "outing" aimed at scaring the delegates. It may be that the ACLU even sympathized with the pro-life website (I just don't remember), so I'm not suggesting that the ACLU is acting hypocritically. I do think, however, that the intent to intimidate may run in both directions in this case, and in any event, First Amendment rights aside, I personally think this approach of listing people's names and home addresses on websites is a pretty socially wicked thing to do.
"Wasn't Indymedia the one who posted the names, addresses and phone numbers of all the delegates to the RNC with specific threats and ideas of mayhem?"
I believe so.
Whenever a cop is murdered, the stuff that is posted on their sites is incredible.
This seizure was probably requested by an ally like the UK.
Then they will let us know about our bad guys after they scan the hard disks.
The pro Islamofascist dumbos who signed on to this site have left an electronic breadcrumb trail to their home or office. The same thugs who troll on Free Republic have done the same thing.