See Robert E. Kessler, 'TWA Probe: Submarines off Long Island/Sources: But No Link to Crash of Jetliner,' Newsday, March 22, 1997, A8.
See, for example, James Sanders, The Downing of TWA Flight 800 (New York: Kensing ton Publishing, 1997), 131–37; Accuracy in Media et al., 'TWA 800 — Missile Website Roadmap,' available at http://www.angelfire.com/hi/TWA800/ (cached: http://www.webcitation.org/5J6luTDWq); Mark K. Anderson, 'Friendly Ire,' available at http://personals.valleyadvocate.com/articles/twa3.html (cached: http://www.webcitation.org/5J6lwXVJ0); Ian W. Goddard, 'TWA Flight 800 and Facts Pertaining to U.S. Navy Culpability,' available at http://users.erols.com/igoddard/twa-fact.htm (cached: http://www.webcitation.org/5J6lzPjpQ).
See Sanders, The Downing of TWA Flight 800, 29–30, 75, 70–79, 171–73.
We can tell that it is false, of course, as in, 'The cat was alive and not alive.'
Initial CBS article on controversy: available at http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/10/politics/main642729.shtml (cached: http://www.webcitation.org/5J6mmhE6S); CBS acknowledgment of mis take: available at http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/20/politics/main644539.shtml (cached: http://www.webcitation.org/5J6mqgf2t).
See Howard Kurtz, 'Rather Admits `Mistake in Judgment,'' Washington Post, Septem ber 21, 2004, A01. ('. . . ending a nearly two-week-long defense of the network's journalistic conduct that media analysts say has badly hurt its credibility.')
Jim Giles, 'Internet Encyclopedias Go Head to Head,' [email protected], December 12, 2005, available at http://www.nature.com/news/2005/051212/full/438900a.html (cached: http://www.webcitation.org/5J6mtVp7S).
See Cass Sunstein, Infortopia: How Many Minds Produce Knowledge (New York: Oxford University Press, 2006).
See Seth Finkelstein, Al Gore 'invented the Internet' — resources, transcript: Vice Pres ident Gore on CNN's Late Edition (last updated Fri April 28, 2006), available at http://www.sethf.com/gore/ (cached: http://www.webcitation.org/5J6mwyqXn).
Ginsburg v. New York , 390 US 629 (1968). Obscenity is not constitutionally protected speech, and federal laws prohibit the transportation of obscene materials; see 18 USCA 1462 (1984), amended by 18 USCA 1462 (Supp 1999). In Miller v. California, the Supreme Court described the test for obscenity as: '(a) whether `the average person, applying contemporary community standards' would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest; (b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and (c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value'; Miller v. California, 413 US 15, 24 (1973) (5–4 decision), rehearing denied, 414 US 881 (1973). Porn, on the other hand, is protected by the First Amendment but may be regulated to promote the state's interest in protecting children from harmful materials so long as the regulation is the least restrictive means to further the articulated interest; see Ginsberg v. New York, 390 US 629, 637–40 (1968). Child porn may be prohibited as obscene material even if it is not obscene under the Miller test, owing to the strong state interest in preventing the sexual exploitation of children; see New York v. Ferber, 458 US 747, 764 (1982). Child porn is not constitutionally protected, and federal law prohibits the transportation of child porn; see 18 USCA 2252 (1984), amended by 18 USCA 2252 (Supp 1999).
Justice Sandra Day O'Connor listed more than 40 states with such law in her concur rence in Reno v. ACLU, 521 US 844, 887 n.2.
Ginsberg v. New York, 390 US 629 (1968).
