 |
|
Topic started on 1-2-2006 @ 07:29 AM by AgentSmith
|
It's an old video (hence Gov not pres Bush), but some of you might not seen it.
Seems a bit excessive for asking a question, though maybe he should have been more tactful.
www.youtube.com...
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 1-2-2006 @ 07:44 AM by Implosion
|
Interesting, Not surprising. This reminds me of Walter Wolfgang.
 Walter Wolfgang, from London, was ejected from the hall after shouting "nonsense" as Foreign Secretary Jack Straw defended Iraq policy.
Source.
More proof if needed, that freedom of speech is, at best, an illusion.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 1-2-2006 @ 08:33 AM by syrinx high priest
|
so we should let people near our leaders that are demonstrating aggressive behaviour ? I disagree
free speech means you can get a permit, and demonstrate outside the white house and say anything you want, as long as you don't incite a riot or use
profanity. It means you don't go to the gulag for disagreeing with the gov't, as long as you don't commit another crime in the process of
expressing your views
it doesn't mean you get to get in a public officials face and cause trouble
thats called disorderly conduct, not free speech
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 1-2-2006 @ 09:05 AM by AgentSmith
|
I have to admit, people like Alex Jones, Bart Sibrel, etc all seem to enjoy getting in people's faces rather than act in a proper manner. Maybe they
would get more joy if they acted appropiately rather than shout like some sort of loony.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 1-2-2006 @ 09:21 AM by Masonic Light
|
Cindy Sheehan was arrested on Capitol Hill last night. Her "crime" was wearing an anti-war T-shirt.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 1-2-2006 @ 09:33 AM by 8th
|
Was he really arrested? Maybe he was just being escorted out or at most detained. People abuse the term arrest left and right now days... Kinda like
how news articals mix up prison and jail. Biiiiiiiiig difference.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 1-2-2006 @ 10:31 AM by syrinx high priest
|
Originally posted by Masonic Light
Cindy Sheehan was arrested on Capitol Hill last night. Her "crime" was wearing an anti-war T-shirt. 
I read she was escorted out because she had a banner. the SOTU address is not the time or place for protesting, imho. She can stand outside the WH
grounds and protest 24/7/365, but she is just going after publicity now, and is actually weaknening her position.
please provide a source showing she was actually arrested and charged with a crime.
oops, my bad.....I have to admit, I was wrong, this is BS
villagevoice.com...
[edit on 1-2-2006 by syrinx high priest]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 1-2-2006 @ 11:06 AM by Odium
|
No, any time is a time for protest.
If you disagree with something, having the ability to say when and where you desire that you do is a fundemental freedom. Something that everyone who
desires to live in a just society should have.
This whole idea of needing permission to protest, is a laugh. Maybe people need to go research the Civil Rights Movements? Or when women began to
protest for the right to vote? Did they wait in line to get permission or go out and attempt to change things?
End of the day, he was being mildly aggressive, but Alex Jones was known back then and he would have been checked for any weapons. It was a simple
case of BushCo even then, not willing to answer questions when challenged and this is why we have the situation we do now...where questions are
"Proof Read" before interviews by politicions...
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 1-2-2006 @ 11:09 AM by syrinx high priest
|
Originally posted by Odium
No, any time is a time for protest.
If you disagree with something, having the ability to say when and where you desire that you do is a fundemental freedom. Something that everyone who
desires to live in a just society should have.
This whole idea of needing permission to protest, is a laugh. Maybe people need to go research the Civil Rights Movements? Or when women began to
protest for the right to vote? Did they wait in line to get permission or go out and attempt to change things?
End of the day, he was being mildly aggressive, but Alex Jones was known back then and he would have been checked for any weapons. It was a simple
case of BushCo even then, not willing to answer questions when challenged and this is why we have the situation we do now...where questions are
"Proof Read" before interviews by politicions... 
true, but there are limits is my point. you do not have freedom to slander, intimidate or incite riots. and when you approach public fugures, you
have to be smart. the securty folks don't know if you are attempting an assassination, harmless or what.
.02
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 1-2-2006 @ 11:19 AM by Off_The_Street
|
In her statement, Sheehan says:
 [Congresswoman] Lynn [Woolsey] brought me a ticket to the State of the Union Address.... I, in fact, had given the ticket to John Bruhns who is
in Iraq Veterans Against the War. However, Lynn's office had already called the media and everyone knew I was going to be there so I sucked it up and
went. 
I think this pretty much says it all. Sheehan is being handled by (as Sheehan herself lists) Congresspersons Lynn Woolsey and John Conyers, Ann
Wright, Malik Rahim and John Cavanagh, and who knows who else.
They've jumped on this poor woman like a dog on a pork-chop, and are using her to focus everyone's attention to THEIR political views.
And why not? Sheehan' pathos is newsworthy, just like the litle kid fallen into and trapped at the bottom of a well.
Even her strongest supporters will admit she's not the sharpest knife in the drawer; do you think SHE is the one who sets up the meetings with Hugo
Chavez et. al.? Hardly!
She is every much a pawn of the left, intent on their own agenda, as the rah-rah boys and girls are pawns of the right and THEIR agenda.
What kind of saddens me is that most people here simply aren't able to see this. You recognize the sad fools of the OTHER side as being suckered
(which they are, of course); but you can't see that those being handled and "pwned" by YOUR side (whichever that is) are just as sad and just as
foolish.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 1-2-2006 @ 12:00 PM by Echtelion
|
Originally posted by syrinx high priest
so we should let people near our leaders that are demonstrating aggressive behaviour ? I disagree
free speech means you can get a permit, and demonstrate outside the white house and say anything you want, as long as you don't incite a riot or use
profanity. It means you don't go to the gulag for disagreeing with the gov't, as long as you don't commit another crime in the process of
expressing your views
it doesn't mean you get to get in a public officials face and cause trouble
thats called disorderly conduct, not free speech 
You're joking, right? Getting a permit for free speech? You're mistaking a "right" for a "priviledge", and as long as somebody expresses his
opinions in a public area or public domain he has the RIGHT to do so, no matter how subversive it is, as long as it is not defamation hate propaganda
such as holocaust denying, i.e. as long as it's does not pose legal prejudice against another person. A governor, or president, is a public person,
and when you attack him verbally it's not a physical person that you are attacking but the representative of an institution. In this case, freedom of
expression applies totally and this is a violation of that right to arrest somebody because he exerted it.
Moreover, nowhere in your Constitution it is written that "freedom of speech" applies only when following guidelines of "behavior" predefined by
the government. As I said, unless such behavior is incriminating, no rules, law or policy can negate free speech. If you're certain of the contrary,
then bring me theses constitutional acts or amendments that says so! And show me what is this "permit" that allows "freedom of expression" in
public?
And asking questions means "aggressive behavior" in your book? Perhaps you think your country should be like good ol' Soviet Union where people get
framed or even shot on sight for questionning officials, or the system as a whole, but I don't think America's there yet (although it's getting
closer). Alex Jones asked Bush questions that he COULD answer, and he did it in a totally uncoercitive manner (have you seen him bully anyone, or just
cutting Bush as he was speaking? No... he even waited until he finished his line!). How do you define "aggression"?
There's a guy here in Canada, Yves Engler, who was arrested for shouting slogans at Paul Martin during an electoral speech.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 1-2-2006 @ 12:29 PM by syrinx high priest
|
there are different rules when you are dealing with public figures. I support these.
The good men and women assigned to protect them don't have time to sit down with every knucklehead that approaches them and rationally discuss thier
motives.
there is a right and wrong way to go about it. thats all I'm saying.
I also support buzz aldrin punching the tin- foil- hat guy that got in his grill.
freedom of speech doesn't give you cart blanche to be an ass.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 1-2-2006 @ 12:39 PM by Zaphod58
|
When Nixon was president he came here on a brief stop. They parked the plane, opened the door, and two guys whipped open a banner saying "Get our of
Vietnam now!" The Secret Service had them on the ground and out of the area before Nixon even got out the door. When dealing with the leader of a
country you can't and don't sit there and go up to a protestor and say "Excuse but I see you have a banner, are you planning something dangerous?"
You get them out of the area, and you get them out of the area fast.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 1-2-2006 @ 02:19 PM by Echtelion
|
Originally posted by syrinx high priest
I also support buzz aldrin punching the tin- foil- hat guy that got in his grill.
freedom of speech doesn't give you cart blanche to be an ass.

Buzz Aldrin, despite having a celebrity status and being a national hero of sorts, is representing no other institution than himself. When Governor
Bush speaks about democracy in America, he speaks in the name of the government he's working for and he is representing a public institution that can
be criticized and questionned. If Bush thinks that Alex Jones behavior was disrespectful, defamatory or violent towards his person, then all he has to
do is to SUE HIM... but that does'nt justify ripping him off from his freedom of speech. Everybody in America has the right to publicly criticize a
leader of State. Contrary to what some people here seem to believe, the President is NOT a god. He's nothing more than an elected public service
officer.
[edit on 1/2/06 by Echtelion]
[edit on 1/2/06 by Echtelion]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 1-2-2006 @ 02:30 PM by syrinx high priest
|
ok, we disagree.
imo, his tone of voice immediately screamed out to everyone in the room...
wacko ! look out ! might have a gun !
I'd recommend he get in touch with some indian casinos, funnel a few million into the republican party, and he might get a meeting.......
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 1-2-2006 @ 11:16 PM by Nakash
|
Look- what's the purpose of protesting if your leaders don't even know a protest is going on? I'm against this
Loved when Jones told Gurgen he was a Molech worshipping pansy who frolicked naked in the woods with Jeb Bush in Bohemian grove. Classic.
Also, Buzz Aldrin was a Mason and anyone should have a good amount of suspicion over the Masonic symbolism in the Apollo program.
"And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of
every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird. For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings
of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies." Revelation
18:2, 3.
Who do you think Apollo is in the bible?
Apollyon
[Gr.,=Destroyer], in the Book of Revelation, name of the angel of the bottomless pit. See Satan; hell.
".....Sata seems to have been an underground aspect of the sun, Horus-Ra, corresponding to Apollo’s underground serpent-form Python, whom the Jews
called Apollyon, Spirit of the Pit. He was a phallic consort of the archaic Goddess Sati, or Setet, whose name was the same as that of a virgin
aspect of Kali, and who once ruled Upper Egypt which was known as the Land f Sati. (See, Larousse, Encyclopedia of Mythology at 37, 335) The god was
also called Set – the biblical Seth, who may not have been immortal but did manage to live 912 years (Genesis 5:8)"

Apollo:
Note the name given to this deity on the Homeric hymn:
www.piney-2.com...
Who is Abaddon?
users.aristotle.net...
Just some random thoughts.
[edit on 1-2-2006 by Nakash]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 2-2-2006 @ 01:58 AM by Paul of Nisbis
|
Originally posted by Echtelion
You're joking, right? Getting a permit for free speech? You're mistaking a "right" for a "priviledge", and as long as somebody expresses his
opinions in a public area or public domain he has the RIGHT to do so, no matter how subversive it is, as long as it is not defamation hate propaganda
such as holocaust denying, i.e. as long as it's does not pose legal prejudice against another person. 
Hate speech laws are just as ridiculous, and Unconstitutional, as permits for free speech. Hate propaganda is legal here, because if it wasn't
then anything not politically correct could get you imprisoned since it would be "hateful." As long as what someone says doesn't include things
like, "I'm going to kill [insert name here]," or, "Overthrow the Constitution by force," it is legal.
[edit on 2-2-2006 by Paul of Nisbis]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 2-2-2006 @ 09:36 AM by syrinx high priest
|
ok, the permit comment was more of a reference to a rally or march or large group of people. I don't want this thread to get derailed by that.
If you want to stand on a street corner in NYC and denouce W all day long, I am 100% behind that.
If W was a true statesman, and his own man, the smart thing would be to let the hecklers speak, as they will dig themselves a hole, and eventually say
something that will distract the public from any potentially interesting info. Give them enough rope to hang themselves
but since he is a puppet for his father, and rove is his brain, he basically freezes.
with that said, a surprise confrontation will (deservedly) provoke security into action.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 2-2-2006 @ 01:41 PM by LoneGunMan
|
I dont see how Alex Jones wa acting aggresivly, I really dont. He calmly asked the Governer about abolishing the Federal Reserve and the CFR. He didnt
sound like a nut, he sounded like an American that wants his country back from the bankers and corporations that stole it from us.
JFK was assisnated for looking at abolishing the Federal Reserve, among other things. Why didnt the president answer that question?
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 2-2-2006 @ 01:57 PM by syrinx high priest
|
if alex jones wanted to get to a politician, he really is not going about it the right way by pouncing on them during speeches, and blurting out
accusations.
he needs to beat them at thier game
raise money.
run for office
make your platform "getting rid of moloch worshipping, child molesting nazi's and the fed"
remember how much publicity that porn star got for running for cali governor in the run off ?
for the record, I have grave suspicions about the fed, and the CFR, but there is a right and wrong way to go about it.
which begs the question, would you donate money to a jones campaign ?
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |