absolute right. you re not allowed to cry fire in a crowded theater. courts have exercised fire restraint to stop people from publishing movements in the time of war. it s not an absolute right. chris, i d expect you to not propagate that ignorance. fire in a crowded theater has not been law for over 40 years. that case was replaced with the standard is even the most inflammatory speech is protected by the first amendment unless it produces eminently unlawful action or is likely to produce imminent harm. these are not the standards. we need to correct people s ignorance. the first amendment without question protects this kind of data. lawfully produced, it s got a cognizant government authority. it s directly related to another protected right which is the second amendment. speech about another amendment is even more protected. chris: first of all, we don t know whether it s protected because a judge issued a temporary restraining order and
reviewing a proposal that could someday award combat medals to u.s. and nato troops for not killing civilians. that s the blunt fact. what they are talking about is restraint, fire restraint in a situation where civilians may be killed might be something that a soldier would get a medal for. in fact, general mcchrystal s spokesman sent us a statement regarding this saying, quote, in some situations our forces face in afghanistan, that restraint is an act of discipline and courage, not much different than those combat actions that mayor merit awards for value. general mcchris stam has made it a top priority to reduce the casualties in afghanistan. the idea of rewarding someone for not killing a civilian is