Bush has told Anti-Christ.com to remove it's photo and links.

http://www.sqlspace.com/viewtopic.php?t=522

Yeah, screw the 1st amendment G-Dub.

as libel under U.S. laws, right?

False and malicious speech designed to professionally damage an individual isn't immune to civil liability.

Catz

__________________
Job 13:5 (New International Version)
If only you would be altogether silent! For you, that would be wisdom.

It's clearly facetious and no one is actually going to think "well gee, this website gives me the option of choosing George Bush or John Kerry as the 'anti-Christ.' That must mean that Bush is the anti-christ! I'm sure not voting for him!"

The website isn't actually using false facts or anything of the sort. It's just a joke. Get over it.

__________________
"Violence isn't always evil. What's evil is the infatuation with violence."
Jim Morrison

That was helpful.

Nonetheless, if it were me, I'd probably sue, too. Who wants to be called the anti=Christ? Particularly if you're a politician?

I don't find it humorous, frankly. And I'm pretty much anti-Christ.

Catz

__________________
Job 13:5 (New International Version)
If only you would be altogether silent! For you, that would be wisdom.

Granted, it's a cliche and just not very funny joke, but still a pathetic excuse for slander.

__________________
"Violence isn't always evil. What's evil is the infatuation with violence."
Jim Morrison

It's no different than the thousands of other silly websites out there slamming Bush or Kerry.

it's his opinion bush is the anti-christ...hows is that NOT covered by free speach?

The president is still a citizen and protected by the same laws of libel.

However, Libel is defined as a false statement of fact. In order to have a good case for it, a court would have to assess whether or not the public would believe this to be true based on the website's claim, and whether or not having that picture on the site would damage his credibility, professional reputation, personal reputation and so on. This is of course is silly. I am sure a court of law would determine a website like this to be very unlikely to have that sort of power.

But, like I said. The president is still a citizen. And, asking someone to take down a picture is not censorship or a blow to the first amendment, because it is not forced. It is simply a request for the webmaster to grow up and have some common respect for people and their religion even if you strongly disagree with them.

__________________
lambaste me not

what if the webmaster honestly beleived he was the anti-christ? then it's his valid opinion. it's not like he's saying as anti-christ he murdered priests....etc