It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gov. Jay Nixon signs exec. order to send Missouri National Guard to Ferguson

page: 96
96
<< 93  94  95    97  98  99 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 21 2014 @ 08:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: spirited75

originally posted by: DancedWithWolves
a reply to: spirited75

The paperwork reads, Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Nothing in there says those peaceably assembled can be forced to march.

And your post violates the T&C. We don't speak to our fellow humans that way here.

Be well and do good things.





i have edited out the middle few lines so you can more accurately comprehend the first amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting ...the right of the people peaceably to assemble,



Congress is not in Missouri making a law that respects the right to peaceably assemble.
Congress in fact is not in session.

ever heard of selective hearing?

you read the first amendment for years with selective vision.


So by your interpretation of the Bill of Rights is that it only restricts Congress from doing these things?
The State and Local governments are free to override or disregard them? If that is the case then what purpose does the Bill of Rights serve then? Is all just smoke and mirrors? Sounds like a pretty dangerous way to look at the document in question.
edit on 8/21/142014 by jholt5638 because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 21 2014 @ 08:31 AM
link   
arm chair monday morning quarterbacks

very successful intervention by the police---
1. no one was hurt

quityerbitching.



posted on Aug, 21 2014 @ 08:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: spirited75
arm chair monday morning quarterbacks

very successful intervention by the police---
1. no one was hurt

quityerbitching.



By a content police state supporter?



posted on Aug, 21 2014 @ 09:25 AM
link   
a reply to: roadgravel

I would anticipate Mr. Holder's office also issuing indictments on the basis of civil and human rights violations committed by the militarized police against protesters and the press in the days following Michael Brown's shooting. There is ample video and testimony of this.



posted on Aug, 21 2014 @ 09:31 AM
link   
a reply to: DancedWithWolves

I'll be waiting for that from Mr. Holder.

You make it seem as though he is in charge of the US justice department or such and has that power.



posted on Aug, 21 2014 @ 10:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: roadgravel

originally posted by: spirited75
arm chair monday morning quarterbacks

very successful intervention by the police---
1. no one was hurt

quityerbitching.



By a content police state supporter?


do you get enough exercise via jumping to conclusions?

it was not a police state action.

it was a police action meant to prevent a peaceful protest from turning into a violent one.

it was a win win situation.

there was a history of the peaceful protest turning violent for several successive days and the intervention used by the police was 100% successful.

you can not argue with the success. all you can really do is call someone who applauds the successful tactic a name.

you can not argue with success. it speaks for itself. the history proves that the peaceful protestors were unable to control their own behavior so they needed an outside force capable of controlling their behavior. the police making the protestors march up and down the street is humorously commendable. kind of shows the intellectual level of the herded people.

i used this same tactic when i was raising children, distraction.



posted on Aug, 21 2014 @ 10:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: DancedWithWolves
a reply to: roadgravel

I would anticipate Mr. Holder's office also issuing indictments on the basis of civil and human rights violations committed by the militarized police against protesters and the press in the days following Michael Brown's shooting. There is ample video and testimony of this.



your anticipation is as effective as a wolf howling at the moon.

it will have the same effect on both the wolf and the moon.

none



posted on Aug, 21 2014 @ 10:39 AM
link   



posted on Aug, 21 2014 @ 10:40 AM
link   
a reply to: spirited75

Most reasonable persons would not give much credit to the police unless they haven't seen much of the event.




do you get enough exercise via jumping to conclusions?


Lame even for the internet.



posted on Aug, 21 2014 @ 11:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: jholt5638

originally posted by: spirited75

originally posted by: DancedWithWolves
a reply to: spirited75

The paperwork reads, Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Nothing in there says those peaceably assembled can be forced to march.

And your post violates the T&C. We don't speak to our fellow humans that way here.

Be well and do good things.





i have edited out the middle few lines so you can more accurately comprehend the first amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting ...the right of the people peaceably to assemble,



Congress is not in Missouri making a law that respects the right to peaceably assemble.
Congress in fact is not in session.

ever heard of selective hearing?

you read the first amendment for years with selective vision.


So by your interpretation of the Bill of Rights is that it only restricts Congress from doing these things?
The State and Local governments are free to override or disregard them? If that is the case then what purpose does the Bill of Rights serve then? Is all just smoke and mirrors? Sounds like a pretty dangerous way to look at the document in question.


It's a bit more complicated regarding the wording and interpretation of the First Amendment. To a certain extent, you're both right on this. Originally, the wording "Congress shall make no law..." was interpreted to mean that it only limited Congress and that states were not limited by this.

The wording was originally an attempt to balance and limit federal authority versus the authority of the states and to be acceptable to both federalists and anti-federalists.

But law is not just what is written in the constitution and amendments or in bills signed into law. There is also case law built up over time regarding interpretation. In this case, there have been Supreme Court decisions that interpreted the Fourteenth Amendment to extend the scope of the First Amendment so that it limited state governments on this as well as Congress.

Wikipedia has a pretty good discussion of this at their article on the First Amendment. The Wiki article also includes links to information on various court decisions that led to the current interpretation.



posted on Aug, 21 2014 @ 01:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: 00nunya00
(Silence falls........)

Sigh. And so it seems that the idea of violence being the only thing that actually moves a cause forward is true after all. No rioting=no live coverage. No violence=no hard-to-keep-up-with threads about justice. The "circuses" part of "bread and circuses" proves itself to be the most important. Crickets from the protesters willing to do this peacefully, as well as from the media (even grass-roots ones) and regrettably from even our own forum.

G'night all. See you for tomorrow's "Day Of Rage" lol. I hope they pull it off.


Power went out last night...for at least 2 hours before I fell asleep...we had a nasty storm role through...thunder so loud I thought I was back in the military.

NG is being ordered out. Thanked for protecting the command areas so police can concentrate at the protesters.

Let's keep an eye on Day of Rage...

And no...I don't think things need to get messy for people to pay attention...ratings for MSM, yes...people need to sleep and work, yes...but they are paying attention...well, those that are awake, keep up wiht current events, and are not buried in entertainment slime...



posted on Aug, 21 2014 @ 01:32 PM
link   
Ugh, I think this needs to be posted almost in full. I know that many of us have complained about the media, but most of us weren't there. This reporter was:

I had been on the ground helping Al Jazeera America cover the protests and unrest in Ferguson, Mo., since this all started last week. After what I saw last night, I will not be returning. The behavior and number of journalists there is so appalling, that I cannot in good conscience continue to be a part of the spectacle.

Things I’ve seen:

-Cameramen yelling at residents in public meetings for standing in way of their cameras

-Cameramen yelling at community leaders for stepping away from podium microphones to better talk to residents

-TV crews making small talk and laughing at the spot where Mike Brown was killed, as residents prayed, mourned

-A TV crew of a to-be-left-unnamed major cable network taking pieces out of a Ferguson business retaining wall to weigh down their tent

-Another major TV network renting out a gated parking lot for their one camera, not letting people in. Safely reporting the news on the other side of a tall fence.

-Journalists making the story about them

-National news correspondents glossing over the context and depth of this story, focusing instead on the sexy images of tear gas, rubber bullets, etc.

-One reporter who, last night, said he came to Ferguson as a “networking opportunity.” He later asked me to take a picture of him with Anderson Cooper.

One anecdote that stands out: as the TV cameras were doing their live shots in front of the one burnt-out building in the three-block stretch of “Ground Zero,” around the corner was a community food/goods drive. I heard one resident say: “Where are the cameras? I’m going to go see if I can find some people to film this.”

Last night a frustrated resident confronted me when he saw my camera: “Yall are down here photographing US, but who gets paid?!”

There are now hundreds of journalists from all over the world coming to Ferguson to film what has become a spectacle. I get the sense that many feel this is their career-maker. In the early days of all this, I was warmly greeted and approached by Ferguson residents. They were glad that journalists were there. The past two days, they do not even look at me and blatantly ignore me. I recognize that I am now just another journalist to them, and their frustration with us is clear. In the beginning there was a recognizable need for media presence, but this is the other extreme. They need time to work through this as a community, without the cameras.

We should all be ashamed, and I cannot do it anymore. I am thankful for my gracious editors who understand that.



posted on Aug, 21 2014 @ 01:36 PM
link   
I only talk to people that are actually reasonable and have the concepts that suppression of an internationally considered human right is both a violation of international law and the law of the land. All laws within the Constitution must be followed by the states. The Bill of Rights does not simply apply to Congress but applies to all states. Any action by the state in violation of one of the amendments in the Bill of Rights, if brought to court, may be struck down as unconstitutional.

This is from the Globe and Mail. Reporter was arrested for asking why media was being withdrawn. There's also footage of the officers walking down the street from very late last night following, dated August 21, 2014.

www.theglobeandmail.com...
edit on 21/8/14 by WhiteAlice because: tired



posted on Aug, 21 2014 @ 01:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: jholt5638

originally posted by: spirited75

Congress shall make no law respecting ...the right of the people peaceably to assemble,




So by your interpretation of the Bill of Rights is that it only restricts Congress from doing these things?
The State and Local governments are free to override or disregard them? If that is the case then what purpose does the Bill of Rights serve then? Is all just smoke and mirrors? Sounds like a pretty dangerous way to look at the document in question.



I am telling you that the bill of rights first amendment says that congress SHALL MAKE NO LAW RESPECTING THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO PEACEABLY ASSEMBLE.

There are a lot of cities and states that have infringed upon the second amendment in the past fifty years, and those infringements are not at a federal level.

Do you want me to interpret the first amendment as it was applied to Missourians?

the Missourians were not being peaceful so the first amendment does not apply.

So by your interpretation of the Bill of Rights is that it only restricts Congress from doing these things? no

The State and Local governments are free to override or disregard them? no

If that is the case then what purpose does the Bill of Rights serve then? does not apply since first two questions were no

Is all just smoke and mirrors? you can think this if you wish

Sounds like a pretty dangerous way to look at the document in question. your opinion



posted on Aug, 21 2014 @ 02:11 PM
link   
Here's another link to the journalist who was arrested after media was told to withdraw last night. I honestly think that he was asking a key question. www.ctvnews.ca...

To understand a bit more about the very early morning activity, I heard a man trying to ask a line of officers standing in a line last night how they were going to get back to their cars and go home in the RT feed last night so basically people were blocked from leaving. He was an older gentlemen, probably in his late 40's to 50's with a group.

Also, ACLU filed a motion for a temporary restraining order against the police tactics being used:


A federal judge Monday night denied a motion by the American Civil Liberties Union for a temporary restraining order to stop police from requiring people to keep moving on sidewalks and thoroughfares in Ferguson unless they're gathered in a designated protest area...The suit by the ACLU was filed Monday against St. Louis County, Highway Patrol Superintendent Ronald Replogle and five individual unnamed police officers. The ACLU says that the practice orders "people who are violating no law ... to refrain from gathering or standing for more than five seconds on public sidewalks."

The suit also said that the measure places "restrictions on the ability of the media to witness and report on unfolding events."


The suit was denied by the Missouri Attorney General.
www.stltoday.com...[editby ]edit on 21/8/14 by WhiteAlice because: added aclu motion for temp restraining order to avoid multiple posting congestion



posted on Aug, 21 2014 @ 02:27 PM
link   
i didn't see this in the thread, so I hope it's not a repost...and if anyone has seen it in other threads, please let me know...but...Star Witness In Michael Brown Shooting Charged With Theft, Filing False Police Report

Dorian Johnson, the primary witness to the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, has an outstanding warrant for a 2011 theft in Jefferson City and pleaded guilty for filing a false police report related to that theft.
....
During the summer after his first semester at Lincoln, Johnson was charged with a misdemeanor after giving police a false first name after he was arrested on suspicion of theft. He later pleaded guilty.

He was accused of stealing a package containing a backpack belonging to someone else from an apartment complex. When he was arrested in that case, he identified himself as Derrick Johnson and said he was 16.

He is wanted for failing to appear in Jefferson City municipal court to answer to the theft charge, court officials said.


This will be used for his character, but I think it's wothy to note that his false report is something many teenagers would do...and it should be noted, he was a young teenager...not a young man.



posted on Aug, 21 2014 @ 02:41 PM
link   
a reply to: AllSourceIntel

Johnson isn't the only witness so in a way, if his testimony is found to be irrelevant or false, that will be discovered by the DoJ investigation as cited from your article and from the source article:


“He’s been very clear about what occurred, and now we have ... four others stating facts that support the statements he’s been making,” Pruitt said. “Why would that diminish other accounts that are relatively the same?”
www.stltoday.com... -50f1-b9e5-345c29dd80dc.html

There's a lot of character assassination going around to be honest. It's rather tiring as quite frankly, I'm withholding my opinion on the provoking incident until that particular verdict is laid out. Justice isn't served by trial by the media. Justice is served in the court rooms. Additionally, regardless of the causation, the policing activities in the state of Missouri has raised their own questions as well in terms of protest treatment, militarization, and freedom of the press.



posted on Aug, 21 2014 @ 02:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: WhiteAlice
a reply to: AllSourceIntel

Johnson isn't the only witness so in a way, if his testimony is found to be irrelevant or false, that will be discovered by the DoJ investigation as cited from your article and from the source article:


“He’s been very clear about what occurred, and now we have ... four others stating facts that support the statements he’s been making,” Pruitt said. “Why would that diminish other accounts that are relatively the same?”
www.stltoday.com... -50f1-b9e5-345c29dd80dc.html

There's a lot of character assassination going around to be honest. It's rather tiring as quite frankly, I'm withholding my opinion on the provoking incident until that particular verdict is laid out. Justice isn't served by trial by the media. Justice is served in the court rooms. Additionally, regardless of the causation, the policing activities in the state of Missouri has raised their own questions as well in terms of protest treatment, militarization, and freedom of the press.


I could not agree with you more. There is a difference between discussing the events, witness testimony, and forensic evidence as it comes out and making end assumptions and conclusions on little information that is evolving and devoloping.



posted on Aug, 21 2014 @ 02:55 PM
link   
a reply to: WhiteAlice

Well the judgement that allows police to "keep people moving and not congregating" ?

That keeps the door open for protesting that issue by itself.

Congregated "stand still" protesting is next ?

I wonder how this applies to public vs private property ?

The Unions need to get involved now.

Where have THEY been lately anyway ?



The new cry; "Stand Still. Don't Move" !!



posted on Aug, 21 2014 @ 03:39 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Actually I heard someone calling for people to stand last night, lol. So yes, spot on, Xuenchen. Stand ins are apparently the new sit-ins to protest forced movement. They actually had people (clergy) getting people to stand on public property only and whenever people strayed into the parking lots, they immediately called for them to come back down onto the sidewalk.

It's the same kind of thing that was occurring, again, with Occupy where the actions by police basically dictated the protest. It went from a protest about bank bailouts, mortgage fraud, student loan issues and more to being about the right to a 24/7 sustained protest on public property.



new topics

top topics


active topics

 
96
<< 93  94  95    97  98  99 >>

log in

join