Censorship: Criminal Offenders Face Restrictions on Net Use

Criminal Offenders Face Restrictions on Net Use

By Kristi Essick, IDG News Service

(December 18, 1996) -- Parolees convicted of certain violent crimes will face tight restrictions on Internet use following a decision handed down yesterday by the U.S. Department of Justice Parole Commission.

Under the terms of the new rule (which takes effect immediately), persons on parole for violations such as child molestation, hate crimes, or the illegal use of explosives, will not be able to use the Internet without written consent from their parole officers, according to Joe Krovisky, a spokesman for the Department of Justice. The Parole Commission met earlier this month to discuss the availability of "how-to" information on the Internet that could be used by such persons to commit crimes.

"Unrestricted access to the Internet and other computer online services can provide sophisticated offenders with new opportunities for crime and criminal associations," Parole Commission Chairman Edward Reilly said in a statement. Reilly said that information collected on the Internet could be used by parolees to repeat their crimes.

In addition to agreeing to get written consent from a parole officer, parolees may also be prohibited from using encryption technology, forced to undergo unannounced examinations of computer use, and required to permit the installation of software or hardware that monitors online access, Krovisky said.

CODOH Comment: One assumes this ban on thought-provoking materials will be extended to libraries as well?

The silly part of the preceding news article aside, and the chilling part we hope obvious, note the employment of an increasingly common "Unholy Trinity"--Child Molestation, Hate Crimes and (in this case) illegal use of explosives, aka "Terrorism."

This triad has been seen in other forums with "hate crimes" replaced by "Holocaust deniers" and terrorism or a synonym replaced by "racists" or other term fitted to the forum intended to arouse maximum disgust. But in all cases, "child molester" or "pedarist" leads off the list.

We courteously and with no ill will (though with a sinking feeling) observe that this is a patently obvious propaganda technique used to smear a target and elicit widespread public disapproval, even, or especially, from the uninformed. A person, activity or idea which is to be driven from the social scene (ausrotten, as one might say in German) is linked to an unrelated but thoroughly onerous social phenomenon, and the two are mentioned together at every opportunity (as in--child molester/revisionist, child molester/revisionist, child molester .....). Eventually, the two (or three) will merge in the minds of readers, and the desired mass hatred is transferred from the well-known universal provider to the lesser-known target. Hate has been expanded and firmly implanted in many minds.

The (what ought to be great) separation between "hate crimes" and what is designated as "hate speech" has narrowed now to an ever more fuzzy line. When that disappears, we will have "speech crimes" in this country, as is the case now in all of Europe, Canada, and a disturbing number of other countries. If someone attempted to operate the CODOH Website in Germany, they would be legally charged under a hate speech statute and promptly jailed for two to five years. Simply accessing the CODOH Website there will soon fall into the same category. (Refer to our Germar Rudolf section for a prime example of this modern-day witch-hunt, and ThoughtCrimes for many more.)

If you think it can't happen here, keep watching this particular development. The First Amendment is being neutered, one small piece at a time. Those who don't pay attention will hardly feel it happening. The harsh reality of the result, however, will most definitely be felt by all.

David Thomas 12/20/96