hasn't visted very many web sites if he seriously considers
site Bonsai Kitten to be a strong candidate for the title of "sickest on the web". How can he overlook the great many sites that seriously advocate genocide
? Time to take a long look at HateWatch
and put the minorly amusing bit of black humor
that is Bonsai Kitten into perspective
I take this seriously because there is a large group of blithering idiots including the Humane Society of the United States that are using bogus complaints in an attempt to have Bonsai Kitten removed entirely from the internet. Everyone knows how ultimately futile this is but it's disturbing how quickly the site was ejected from three hosts and mirrors were removed from eight free web services. The site is now hosted by rotten.com and is expected to remain there.
Even PETA (notorious for their shock tactic advertising) believes that "this type of Web site should be shut down" (although they admit that it is "unfortunately" legal). Don't they realize that the laws protecting Bonsai Kitten are the same ones protecting their photos of dismembered cows?
According to a Wired
News article "FBI
agents in the Boston
field office have launched an investigation into Bonsai Kitten
. They also have served MIT
with a grand jury subpoena
asking for 'any and all subscriber information' about the site, which was initially hosted in a campus dormitory". Your tax dollars hard at work
's write up is just the sort of chicken little
-esque speculation that created this whole mess. I expect better from a Content Editor.
A short investigation reveals that the "obscure law" he references is most likely "To amend title 18, United States Code, to punish the depiction of animal cruelty" aka Public Law No. 106-152 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106:h.r.01887:) which was signed in 1999. The summary of this law is as follows:
Amends the Federal criminal code to prohibit, and set penalties for, knowingly creating, selling, or possessing a depiction of animal cruelty with the intention of placing that depiction in interstate or foreign commerce for commercial gain. Makes an exception for any depiction that has serious religious, political, scientific, educational, journalistic, historical, or artistic value.
Please note the emphasis (mine). So what's the Bonsai Kitten site selling? Nothing. Could it be termed artistic? IANAL, but it certainly seems plausible. Looks like the sky isn't falling after all.
Just be happy I didn't flood your ISP with complaints. I am deeply offended by your use of the "humour" spelling on a web site that is hosted in the U.S.