Previous threads talked of the military sponsoring a riot at NY Times Square during the New Years celebration - HOAX - see following:

http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,32746,00.html

WIRED MAGAZINE Y2K Spoof Flick Goes Awry by Craig Bicknell

11:00 a.m. 24.Nov.1999 PST Mike Zieper wanted to tap into current passions with his video art. To do it, he made a grainy, gray tape in which a faceless narrator prepares his soldiers to unleash a government-sponsored riot in Times Square at midnight 2000.

The plan: to create chaos so federal troops have an excuse to move in.

Weird thing was, after Zieper posted the video clip on his Web site, the troops did move in.

"This FBI agent called," said Zieper. "He said, 'There are a lot of people planning to vacation in New York this year, a lot of them are coming to your site and they're getting scared. I want to talk to you about how we can stop people from coming to this site.'"

Zieper called a lawyer and didn't pull the site. So both the FBI and the US Attorney's Office went upstream to Zieper's Web hosting company, BECamation in Michigan, and asked that Zieper's site be pulled. There was no threat of legal action, but BECamation president Mark Wieger complied.

"We didn't want to take any chances with our business, so we pulled it down," Wieger said.

In doing so, Wieger pulled a lever that let loose a virtual riot among free-speech advocates. After the Village Voice published a piece about the incident, online message boards erupted in protest. Now the American Civil Liberties Union is considering a lawsuit on Zieper's behalf.

"We think, certainly, that it's very improper for the FBI to be harassing an Internet hosting company to take down content that may be disturbing, but is certainly protected by the First Amendment," said ACLU staff attorney Ann Beeson.

The FBI did not respond to a request for comment.

Meanwhile, the video itself has been copied and posted on numerous mirror sites.

It's a hit beyond anything Zieper could have anticipated. Reality has woven a fresh, relevant, scene into the video's fiction and given it a nice buzz. A grand slam for a struggling artist.

"If this gets people to look at all this stuff seriously, that's fantastic. That's exactly what I wanted to do," Zieper said.

That doesn't mean he's not upset, particularly on behalf of Mark Wieger, who's been besieged by vicious flame emails decrying his decision to pull Zieper's site.

"They're saying, 'Why didn't you stand up for the Constitution?'" Zieper said. "I think that's very easy to say from afar, but when the knock comes for you it's a terrifying experience. They tried to infer that he best get out of the way."

That has Zieper wondering what else the FBI is up to. "I hope this is just an aberration," he said. "I hope that they review the constitution back at the FBI and don't try to do anything like this again."

-- mmmm (mmmm@mmmm.com), November 24, 1999

Answers

Earlier post...

-- Uncle Bob (UNCLB0B@Tminus37&counting.down), November 24, 1999.

Earlier post...

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001qml

-- Uncle Bob (UNCLB0B@Tminus37&counting.down), November 24, 1999.

***BEFORE anyone starts crying "1st Ammendment."***

Remember, Free speech doesn't give you the right to shout "fire" in a theatre. THAT, is basically what this schlamele did. Personally, I'd like to see him spend a nice safe warm Y2K evening down in a county jail somewhere.

-- RJ (LtPita@aol.com), November 25, 1999.

Well, RJ, we seem to have a little problem here, in that no one has accused the guy of breaking any laws!

Kind of hard to put him in jail for NOT breaking a law, wouldn't you think?

Perhaps that's why the government chose to -- rather than *prosecute* him -- intimidate him and his ISP into complying with their wishes?

It's a sad day when putatively free people defend strongarm tactics against people simply because the government doesn't like what they say.

-- Ron Schwarz (rs@clubvb.com.delete.this), November 25, 1999.

Mr. Schwarz,

I'm not an attorney, and I suspect you aren't either (at least not one versed in Federal Law.) What the clown did was akin to yelling fire in a theatre--he played on the fears (real & imagined) of a portion of the population--which is done by Add types daily, I know-- for pure self interest...to make a name for himself.

Fine, the capitalist way of making a buck, I'm not arguing that. I AM SAYING that by intentionally inciting fear and (hatred, dread, you pick the word) against both the government and INNOCENTS doing their jobs--NG, police, FEMA, EMS. etc. IS DESERVING of having his @$$ stuck in a hole. I'm not citing laws here, merely a personal opinion.

It is strikingly apparent that you have never been in a life/death situation, and with a total unknown of Y2K coming upon us with a potential of well over a million people in Times Square, the attempt by one p[erson to capitalize on the situation is deplorable. If THAT line of logic escapes you, I'm sorry because it is YOU who are the victim here.

-- RJ (LtPita@aol.com), November 26, 1999.

RJ, would you have thrown Orson Welles in jail for broadcasting his 1938 'War of the Worlds' play? What about Sinclair Lewis, for writing 'It Can't Happen Here?' Or the people who made 'Jaws,' for that matter. Or what about the people who made 'Terms of Engagement:' they got a lot of people stirred up. Your thoughts on First Amendment rights are simply...breathtaking.

-- Sjpipidey (free@last.Amen), November 26, 1999.