Is it o.k. to agree with the Unabomber?

A thought-provoking story in the Washington Post today reports that Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, "wrote a letter to a federal appeals court complaining about a museum exhibit of the tiny cabin where he plotted an 18-year bombing spree."

The cabin is on display at the Newseum in Washington, D.C. as part of an exhibit about the relationship of the FBI and journalists. Kaczynski says the display is not in keeping with previous requests by his victims to limit further publicity about the case. He reportedly "has also been battling in federal court in northern California over the auction of his journals and other correspondence."

"Since the advertisement states that the cabin is 'FROM FBI VAULT,' it is clear that the government is responsible for the public exhibition of the cabin. This has obvious relevance to the victims' objection to publicity connected with the Unabom case," he wrote in the letter... "I don't think I need to say anything further," he added. "The Court can draw its own conclusions."

The exhibit at the Newseum also includes Patty Hearst's coat, Dillinger's death mask, and the electric chair used to electrocute Bruno Hauptmann.

This is a hard call. Does the public have a "right to know?" Is this exhibit pandering to morbid curiosity for the purpose of publicity and fundraising? If Kaczynski's personal items are auctioned off and the money used for "good purposes," is that appropriate?

I don't know, and it's too much to think through right now. It's not as egregious as exhibiting Napoleon's penis (about which more some other time). I'll just post this for information now and move on to other things, such as buried giants and chess puzzles...