When does it stop being literature, starts being terrorism

SkyHog

SkyHog

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
18,510
Location
Middle of nowhere Texas
Display Name
Everything Offends Me
Home Airfield
KLUD
High philosophical discussion tonight between me and some coworkers:

Imagine writing a book, in which you detail a hypothetical terrorist attack. The attack is successful in the book, and is very graphic and detailed (and, technically, its feasible should someone decide to do it).

At what point does the manuscript no longer contains the pages of a piece of literary artwork, and becomes a script for plotting a terrorist attack?

More over - is there any protection granted to people who write a book that contains such details?
 
SkyHog said:
High philosophical discussion tonight between me and some coworkers:

Imagine writing a book, in which you detail a hypothetical terrorist attack. The attack is successful in the book, and is very graphic and detailed (and, technically, its feasible should someone decide to do it).

At what point does the manuscript no longer contains the pages of a piece of literary artwork, and becomes a script for plotting a terrorist attack?

More over - is there any protection granted to people who write a book that contains such details?
Click to expand...

Almost every Tom Clancy novel ever written, has in some fashion or another, come true.

He described using airliners to attack Washington D.C., years before it happened. Pretty sure no one has held him liable.
 
denverpilot said:
Almost every Tom Clancy novel ever written, has in some fashion or another, come true.

He described using airliners to attack Washington D.C., years before it happened. Pretty sure no one has held him liable.
Click to expand...

That argument came up - the question: If the FBI had raided his house and found the work in progress, is it still a literary work, or is it a plot, and would he be potentially held as a conspirator?
 
SkyHog said:
That argument came up - the question: If the FBI had raided his house and found the work in progress, is it still a literary work, or is it a plot, and would he be potentially held as a conspirator?
Click to expand...

What did the search warrant say? :)
 
Just to stir the pot, there was reportedly a case last week of a talk show host that flew to Hawaii - during the flight over he was placed on the no-fly list... He could not continue to Okinawa, nor could he return home....
 
"Moreover" is one word...

...regardless of the terrorist implications.

;)


SkyHog said:
...is there any protection granted to people who write a book that contains such details?
Click to expand...
Post 9/11? Protection? ROFL.
 
Last edited:
wsuffa said:
Just to stir the pot, there was reportedly a case last week of a talk show host that flew to Hawaii - during the flight over he was placed on the no-fly list... He could not continue to Okinawa, nor could he return home....
Click to expand...

So what did he do? Slow boat to China?
 
You are guilty if some b'crat or cop decides you are guilty. Maybe they dont like you, ,aybe they want to seize your stuff. Between the drug laws and the ndaa, patriot act, eea(not sure if that has passed yet) we are all guilty.
 
SkyHog said:
High philosophical discussion tonight between me and some coworkers:

Imagine writing a book, in which you detail a hypothetical terrorist attack. The attack is successful in the book, and is very graphic and detailed (and, technically, its feasible should someone decide to do it).

At what point does the manuscript no longer contains the pages of a piece of literary artwork, and becomes a script for plotting a terrorist attack?

More over - is there any protection granted to people who write a book that contains such details?
Click to expand...

That's just about every Tom Clancy book.
 
denverpilot said:
Almost every Tom Clancy novel ever written, has in some fashion or another, come true.

He described using airliners to attack Washington D.C., years before it happened. Pretty sure no one has held him liable.
Click to expand...

"Sum of All Fears" I believe.
 
If Tom Clancy ran afoul of the TSA, he'd be raided and his latest work of fiction would be considered his manifesto. Then again, they would actually have to be able to read.
 
ClimbnSink said:
Heck no. Just pointing out that in this day you are a terrorist when the govt decides you are a terrorist.
Click to expand...

Well that was one thing both parties could agree on. More restrictions to our freedoms in the name of security.
 
Has the DHS opened up a department for the thought police yet?

If you can think it, even if you don't think it, just have the ability to think it, you're a terrorist.

In 100 years, or more likely less time, this country is going to be the 1984 version of North Korea, or worse.
 
SkyHog said:
High philosophical discussion tonight between me and some coworkers:

Imagine writing a book, in which you detail a hypothetical terrorist attack. The attack is successful in the book, and is very graphic and detailed (and, technically, its feasible should someone decide to do it).

At what point does the manuscript no longer contains the pages of a piece of literary artwork, and becomes a script for plotting a terrorist attack?

More over - is there any protection granted to people who write a book that contains such details?
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's called the First Amendment to the US Constitution. Did that come up in your discussion at all?
 
Jeanie said:
Why did they put him on the list?
Click to expand...

Who knows, and the Government won't say. They keep that a "secret", won't even tell the person who is affected, and they've staunchly argued "national security" when folks have tried to take them to court.

There have been other cases where journalists have ended up on the list for a brief time after writing stories critical of the TSA, though TSA denies there is any connection.

fgcason said:
Has the DHS opened up a department for the thought police yet?

If you can think it, even if you don't think it, just have the ability to think it, you're a terrorist.

In 100 years, or more likely less time, this country is going to be the 1984 version of North Korea, or worse.
Click to expand...

There are reports that folks have been removed from airliners, detained and questioned after reading books about airplanes.... (link), and at least one passenger has been booted off a plane for wearing an anti-TSA t-shirt.
 
SkyHog said:
High philosophical discussion tonight between me and some coworkers:

Imagine writing a book, in which you detail a hypothetical terrorist attack. The attack is successful in the book, and is very graphic and detailed (and, technically, its feasible should someone decide to do it).

At what point does the manuscript no longer contains the pages of a piece of literary artwork, and becomes a script for plotting a terrorist attack?

More over - is there any protection granted to people who write a book that contains such details?
Click to expand...

There are no one-man conspiracies.

The line is between exercising your First Amendment right to expression, and agreeing to engage in a knowing conspiracy with at least one other person to break the law. The other person doesn't necessarily need to be an intimate of yours, but they can't be simply theoretical.
 
SkyHog said:
....

At what point does the manuscript no longer contains the pages of a piece of literary artwork, and becomes a script for plotting a terrorist attack?......
Click to expand...

As long as you live in a free country like the US, it never becomes illegal to write/speak about anything you want, now if you were in a totalitarian 3rd world country, like China or something, it probably is a crime if it bothers the powers that be.

SkyHog said:
....
More over - is there any protection granted to people who write a book that contains such details?
Click to expand...

Yes, the first amendment of the constitution of the United States of America guarantees you that protection
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Yeah, it's called the First Amendment to the US Constitution. Did that come up in your discussion at all?
Click to expand...

A few times, mostly as a joke. Unfortunately, I don't think that would be a valid defense, otherwise the Unibomber wouldn't have been arrested based on his manifesto.

The point is that its a fine line. It reminds me of another point very similar that I discussed once - the lyrics to "Pumped up Kicks." If that were written by a school-aged kid, he would be put into therapy and considered demented and a risk to humanity. Since it was written by an adult, its artistic.

So where is that line drawn, and who gets to draw it?
 
NineThreeKilo said:
As long as you live in a free country like the US, it never becomes illegal to write/speak about anything you want, now if you were in a totalitarian 3rd world country, like China or something, it probably is a crime if it bothers the powers that be.



Yes, the first amendment of the constitution of the United States of America guarantees you that protection
Click to expand...

I disagree. If I sat down with some friends and wrote out a plan that said "We are going to attack xxx location by doing yyy," I'd be a conspirator. But if I say down with a group of friends and wrote a book in which the protagonists attacked xxx location by doing yyy....that's the question - at what point does it cross the line?
 
NineThreeKilo said:
As long as you live in a free country like the US, it never becomes illegal to write/speak about anything you want, now if you were in a totalitarian 3rd world country, like China or something, it probably is a crime if it bothers the powers that be.



Yes, the first amendment of the constitution of the United States of America guarantees you that protection
Click to expand...

Free speech is not totally free - there are limits. You can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater, for example, and limits on pronography have been upheld. Commercial speech also has limits.
 
SkyHog said:
A few times, mostly as a joke. Unfortunately, I don't think that would be a valid defense, otherwise the Unibomber wouldn't have been arrested based on his manifesto.

The point is that its a fine line. It reminds me of another point very similar that I discussed once - the lyrics to "Pumped up Kicks." If that were written by a school-aged kid, he would be put into therapy and considered demented and a risk to humanity. Since it was written by an adult, its artistic.

So where is that line drawn, and who gets to draw it?
Click to expand...

The Unabomber was arrested based on his manifesto?
 
wsuffa said:
Free speech is not totally free - there are limits. You can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater, for example, and limits on pronography have been upheld. Commercial speech also has limits.
Click to expand...


Yea, it is. The Constitution was written clearly and is the responsibility of THE PEOPLE to see it is upheld.
 
SkyHog said:
A few times, mostly as a joke. Unfortunately, I don't think that would be a valid defense, otherwise the Unibomber wouldn't have been arrested based on his manifesto.
Click to expand...

The Unabomber (UNA for UNiversity & Airline, not Uni as in one) was arrested based on bombing the **** out of a bunch of people, not for writing a manifesto.

-- Captain Obvious
 
Add "hate speech" to your hithertofore unpublished book under your pillow... make the plot of your fiction, a plan to terrorize any given racial minority group.

Now if your manuscript is found, will you be arrested?

Have you committed a "hate crime"?

Let's say that same generic minority group was behind a real terrorist plot, that successfully killed innocent civilians a month ago.

Are you now safe to have your "hate speech" book under your pillow? Are you forgiven in your anger compared to better days prior?

Nicknames that were common for all of our adversaries in previous wars, are also now generally inappropriate speech.

Times change. If it were written today, even Rogers and Hammerstein's classic musical, "South Pacific" -- wouldn't be picked up and performed by Broadway.
 
NineThreeKilo said:
Yea, it is. The Constitution was written clearly and is the responsibility of THE PEOPLE to see it is upheld.
Click to expand...

"The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins."


denverpilot said:
Add "hate speech" to your hithertofore unpublished book under your pillow... make the plot of your fiction, a plan to terrorize any given racial minority group.

Now if your manuscript is found, will you be arrested?

Have you committed a "hate crime"?
Click to expand...

"[E]ven a dog distinguishes between being stumbled over and being kicked, ..."
 
alaskaflyer said:
"The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins."
Click to expand...

Correct.

One can write and speak about hurting ones fellow man, this is a right.

However if one phsyically attack ones fellow man without cause, there will be repercussions.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top