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.

 

Cindy Sheehan will be at The State of the Union Address!

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
Most all the Cindy Sheehan threads on ATS were started by angry Republicans complaining about her antics.


Pointed out by Grady on another thread -
These are just SOME of the Cindy threads
started by her fans (hint - they aren't
angry republicans).

politics.abovetopsecret.com...

politics.abovetopsecret.com...

politics.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.belowtopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

politics.abovetopsecret.com...




posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 12:57 PM
link   
The issue should not be the subject of her protest - protest of all kinds is equally legitimate; after all, who decides what is right and what is wrong when everyone has different opinions? - but instead the legitimacy of laws preventing protest in the Capitol building.

I have not read these laws or even seen evidence of them (and if someone could point me in their direction, I'd be grateful), but I believe the law should only extend to truly disruptive protest. Shouting, obstructing people's view or otherwise preventing people from hearing the speech.*

But wearing a t-shirt that says "2,245 Dead - How Many More?" is not a disruptive protest. As I said before, applauding every five seconds is far more disruptive to the listeners than a t-shirt. Now, I have heard reports that she tried to unfurl a banner as well. I do not know the details or truthfulness of this, but a banner is somewhat more disruptive. I still think she shouldn't have been arrested, but...

*And please note that even a law prevents this, I am not opposed to breaking that law in some cases. When a government is corrupt, sometimes, you just have to be disruptive to get people's attention about things.



posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
They (you) want her out of the picture BECAUSE of her influence and effect on public opinion.


No. See I love Cindy Sheehan. She is help turn people against the anti-war effort. I still however think that she is wrong.

Also, a Republican congressman's wife was ejected from The State of the Union last night as well. She was wearing a "support the troops" T-shirt.



The wife of Rep. C.W. Bill Young, R-Indian Shores, told a newspaper that she was ejected during the State of the Union address for wearing a T-shirt that says, "Support the Troops Defending Our Freedom."

NBC 6 Link.


-- Boat



posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Boatphone
Also, a Republican congressman's wife was ejected from The State of the Union last night as well. She was wearing a "support the troops" T-shirt.


See, I'm opposed to that too. It doesn't cause a problem and should be left alone.



posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Boatphone
Also, a Republican congressman's wife was ejected from The State of the Union last night as well. She was wearing a "support the troops" T-shirt.


Was she arrested? I didn't think so.

I am glad to see that they treated both sides of the issue, however imbalanced. But I'm with LoganCole, both shirts are a long way from a protest and both should have been allowed to stay.

Didn't people have purple fingers at last year's SoTU Address?



But that's ok, because.... Uh... because.... uh.....


Hey, if a 'support the troops' T-shirt is not ok, why are purple fingers allowed?

WHERE DO YOU DRAW THE LINE?



posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 03:44 PM
link   
the purple finger is such a myth

those that voted and dipped their fingers in ink were in the safest spots in iraq, and had no threats of violence against them.

as for the tshirt thing

it's what the wife of the congressman said, so that's all we have to go on.

now, if you're the wife of a congressman, going to an event televised across the nation, would you REALLY wear a tshirt?

it's a formal event, and not one woman there would be caught dead wearing a tshirt.

also, we only have her word for it, and she probably has her own agenda there.



posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Boatphone
Cindy Sheehan will be in the room when President Bush gives the State of the Union Speech tonight! I wonder is Sheehan will make a desprate grab for attention and disrupt the speech.


Why else would she be there? You know if she would have just showed up and sat there and smiled, she would have captured some tv time for sure. Now she just looks like a bafoon. What's new?



40 USC CHAPTER 51 - UNITED STATES CAPITOL BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS

Sec. 5104. Unlawful activities

(f) Parades, Assemblages, and Display of Flags. - Except as
provided in section 5106 of this title, a person may not -

(2) display in the Grounds a flag, banner, or device (aka t-shirt) designed or adapted to bring into public notice a party, organization, or movement.


Come on! Everyone knows about Section 504, statute f, 2
What was she thinking?



posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by goose
There are five different stages of grief and anger is one of them,

I personally think it is despicable that he can't take the time
to meet with her or any parent ....


Sorry goose, but this isn't exactly right.

Yes there are stages to grief. But your statement that 'he can't
take the time to meet with her or any parent' is wrong. He HAS
met with her. He has met with many of the other family members
as well. He took the time.



I've already stated once in this thread that I was aware that he had previously met with her. I am aware that he has met with other families. But she is the only one requesting that he meet with her and I personally don't think that is too much to ask.



posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Boatphone
Also, a Republican congressman's wife was ejected from The State of the Union last night as well. She was wearing a "support the troops" T-shirt.



The wife of Rep. C.W. Bill Young, R-Indian Shores, told a newspaper that she was ejected during the State of the Union address for wearing a T-shirt that says, "Support the Troops Defending Our Freedom."

NBC 6 Link.


-- Boat


Yep thats what all them republican wives wear to such an event, a T-Shirt. Surely you don't think that this little episode was just a measure to counter any arguments about Cindy being thrown out and arrested? Also please note the fact that this Republican Congressman's wife was not arrested.

[edit on 1-2-2006 by goose]



posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 05:20 PM
link   
The charges were dropped.

msnbc.msn.com...



posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 05:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Boatphone

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
They (you) want her out of the picture BECAUSE of her influence and effect on public opinion.


No. See I love Cindy Sheehan. She is help turn people against the anti-war effort. I still however think that she is wrong.

Also, a Republican congressman's wife was ejected from The State of the Union last night as well. She was wearing a "support the troops" T-shirt.



The wife of Rep. C.W. Bill Young, R-Indian Shores, told a newspaper that she was ejected during the State of the Union address for wearing a T-shirt that says, "Support the Troops Defending Our Freedom."

NBC 6 Link.


-- Boat


I was just about to point out that no one seems to care about the republican than got kicked out for the same reason. I guess they wouldn’t be able to make a conspiracy of it otherwise, so they ignore it.



posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dronetek
I was just about to point out that no one seems to care about the republican than got kicked out for the same reason. I guess they wouldn’t be able to make a conspiracy of it otherwise, so they ignore it.


Actually, if you look up a few posts, I and several other people said that she should not have been removed either. The t-shirts are harmless and should absolutely be allowed.



posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dronetek
I was just about to point out that no one seems to care about the republican than got kicked out for the same reason. I guess they wouldn’t be able to make a conspiracy of it otherwise, so they ignore it.


Read the thread. It's already been discussed, not ignored.

cnn



On Wednesday afternoon, U.S. Capitol Police Chief Terrance Gainer said neither woman should have been removed from the chamber. "We made a mistake," he told CNN.

He said an apology was made to Bill and Beverly Young, and the congressman has been told that Capitol officers will receive better training. He said they are operating under outdated guidance on House rules regarding demonstrations.

"Just wearing a T-shirt is not unlawful," Gainer said. Wearing a T-shirt and engaging in actions meant to draw attention to the shirt is against the law, he said, but neither woman was doing so.



Who's going to ignore THIS?


[edit on 1-2-2006 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
cnn



"Just wearing a T-shirt is not unlawful," Gainer said. Wearing a T-shirt and engaging in actions meant to draw attention to the shirt is against the law, he said, but neither woman was doing so.


Nice find. And it fits in with what I was saying: a t-shirt is not disruptive. Glad they aren't as stupid as I had thought, even if the arresting officers were overzealous. (Although, my suspicious self suspects that if only Sheehan had been wearing a political t-shirt and not the wife of the congressman as well.)



posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 06:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by LoganCale
Glad they aren't as stupid as I had thought...


I don't know about that.


My guess is that they would have found a way to get her out of there regardless what she was wearing. Her mere presence there would take some of the limelight away from the president. The cameras couldn't have avoided her.

They can always apologize the next day. But too late, the SoTU is over.



posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 06:23 PM
link   
Cindy Sheehan makes a statement about her arrest and before anyone starts hollering about it being on Michael Moore's website, I'm betting she did not get too many offers from conservatives to put it on their website. This has become an issue of freedom of speech but sadly I find that some conservatives only support freedom of speech when it is their side saying what they want to.


www.michaelmoore.com...
The officer ran with me to the elevators yelling at everyone to move out of the way. When we got to the elevators, he cuffed me and took me outside to await a squad car. On the way out, someone behind me said, "That's Cindy Sheehan." At which point the officer who arrested me said, "Take these steps slowly." I said, "You didn't care about being careful when you were dragging me up the other steps." He said, "That's because you were protesting." Wow, I get hauled out of the People's House because I was, "Protesting."

I was never told that I couldn't wear that shirt into the Congress. I was never asked to take it off or zip my jacket back up. If I had been asked to do any of those things...I would have, and written about the suppression of my freedom of speech later. I was immediately, and roughly (I have the bruises and muscle spasms to prove it) hauled off and arrested for "unlawful conduct." [quote/]


[edit on 1-2-2006 by goose]



posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 07:25 PM
link   
Supreme Court.

Cohen V California, 1971


Obviously not on your reading lists.



posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 09:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Pointed out by Grady on another thread -
These are just SOME of the Cindy threads
started by her fans (hint - they aren't
angry republicans).

...

politics.abovetopsecret.com...




Excuse me?
Where have I ever said or implied that I am a fan or supporter of Cindy Sheehn.

That was an ATSNN submission. I was reporting on the news.

Edit:
Other threads assumed to of been made by a Sheehn fan
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I will be sure never to make a thread that has Sheehn in the text again. It may be used against some body.


[edit on 1/2/2006 by Umbrax]



posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Umbrax
Excuse me?

That was an ATSNN submission. I was reporting on the news.


ALL of those threads listed by FF (and Grady) were news stories, back in August and Sept of last year when Sheehan was in Crawford TX and in the news and we were reporting on that. But that doesn't matter to the likes of FF and Grady, apparently. If you mention Cindy Sheehan in a less than hateful way and don't call her a whore of some sort, then you're labeled as a liberal peace nik or some such nonsense. I wouldn't let it bother me if I were you. I don't, in fact.



I will be sure never to make a thread that has Sheehn in the text again. It may be used against some body.


I certainly hope you don't let this meaningless accusation keep you from reporting the news. I love your style.


Oh, and Nerdling, I knew about that case.


[edit on 1-2-2006 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Mar, 19 2006 @ 02:02 PM
link   
By doing and saying what she has done it makes you think that she didn't nor does respect the choices of her son.







 
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join