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.

 

Man charged with Assault for criticizing Cheney

page: 7
0
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 12:32 PM
link   
Mr. Medic, you say



If this guy seemed even a little suspicious, they had every right to question him and when he was not cooperating, detain him.


Really? Do you have authority for that assertion? Do you really believe that a citizen can be detained merely "for not cooperating"?

What did you read in the media reports of the incident that makes you believe Mr. Howards "was not cooperating"?

Or do you blindly follow authority, merely because of its official status, just like esdad71?

[edit on 10/16/2006 by dubiousone]

[edit on 10/16/2006 by dubiousone]




posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 12:33 PM
link   
E71 sorry to here you were beaten by the Fasict Police, but it does raise some questions. After being Hospitalised by the Police has the experience altered your way of thinking, would or has it now stopped you from speaking out against authority.

If this is the case then this is the very thing I am talking about, where normal law abiding citizens are pushed to the point of attacking the Goverment (verbally), and where such people could be legally physically attacked, jailed or fined for their actions.

Do you respect the Police/ Goverment more or less since the incident, has it made you scared of authority. (no sarcasm)



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 12:38 PM
link   
www.vaildaily.com...

quote:
The U.S. Secret Service is offering no details about the arrest of Steven Howards, who they allege acted strangely around Vice President Dick Cheney on Friday during an economic summit in Beaver Creek.

"His behavior and demeanor wasn't quite right," Secret Service spokesman Eric Zahren said on Friday. "The agents tried to question him, and he was argumentative and combative."

On Monday, another spokesman for the Secret Service refused to say what "wasn't quite right" about Howards' demeanor and whether federal charges were brought against Howards.


This is from the second page of this post. No, being beaten by the authorites did not change my views. I have alwasy been leary of authority and thinkg that often times they do take it too far, but it is never the true offenders that are caught. It is the one off IAD investigation that takes down a good man who made one mistake.

If you don't like the way I feel about the Secret Service, you have that choice. However, these men did nothing more than their job.

Also, When the NWO does come to my door to take me for no reason as so many of you state will occur, they will find the fun end of a Mossberg.



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Boondocks - This Block is Hot

Uncle Ruckus has called the police on Riley for opening a fire hydrant, and several squad cars arrive on the scene


Ruckus Well if it idn't the brave men and women from the police department come to save the day.

Officer (gun drawn) Get out of the truck and show me some ID

Ruckus I see, that's a fine idea officer, can't be to careful. I'm just gonna reach into my back pocket and pull out my safety orrange wallet.

Officer GUN!!! (all begin shooting)

Ruckus It's a case of mistaken identity! I got Indian in my family!!

Officer (several clicks of unloaded weapons)

Ruckus It's okay officer, it's okay I got a backup wallet just in case. That's where I keep my spare blockbuster card

Officer GUN!!! (all proceed to beat Ruckus with their battons)

Ruckus It's okay, I understand what you're doin'


I know I brought it up before, but in case anyone missed it, this is from an episode of The Boondocks called
This Block is Hot


thought it was appropriate

[edit on 16-10-2006 by Rasobasi420]



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by esdad71
They told me that there was nothing I could do about when I was in the car, since they were both 10+ year vets of the SPPD and their word is bond.


And yet you still believe the SS agent over the citizen? How sad.

Howards might be lying and he might not be. But yet you would rather take the word of the authority? Even after you've been through something like that?



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 12:46 PM
link   
posted on 10/16/2006 at 10:30 AM (post id: 2554506)

esdad71 says


* * * You are right, I did nothing wrong, * * * They told me that there was nothing I could do about when I was in the car, since they were both 10+ year vets of the SPPD and their word is bond. That is how it is made a open and shut case and gave me a year probation.* * *"


Don't you see! You describe the problem perfectly. You experienced it personally. The jury members or judge didn't think and analyze the evidence. They accepted the cops' word just because they are cops and you aren't. You are doing the very same thing in your posts about Mr. Howards' case.

esdad71, you say


I can only assume, but I am sure that * * *"


Once again you illustrate the problem perfectly and fail to see the problem. When you say "I assume . . ." you're filling in the gaps that exist in the official story. That's what they want you to do. That's what they want other citizens to do. All they have to do is disseminate conclusory characterizations without taking a position as to what the facts are. They can count on you and other members of the public to automatically fill in the gaps as you've been conditioned to do, i.e. accept the offical version and automatically conclude that the "non-official" citizen acted wrongly.

When did the massses stop thinking? Maybe they never started.

[edit on 10/16/2006 by dubiousone]



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 12:47 PM
link   
magicmushroom,

no, it does not and I am active in local politics to make sure things of that nature do not occur, and that everyone is given a fair shot. I am amazed at the attitude I get for beleiving the USSS over what apparently is a guy with a chip on his shoulder. I could have easily sued the SPPD after my incident, and filed an IAD report. The officers in question were found guilty of wrong doing, but I did not pursue a civil case becasue justice was served.



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 12:49 PM
link   


But yet you would rather take the word of the authority? Even after you've been through something like that?


Its called being brainwashed....no matter how repulsive or abusive an authority figure acts you are to trust they have your best interest at heart.....after all they can do no wrong....just ask Rodney King



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 12:50 PM
link   
Esdad, do you believe that justice is always served, and the IAD will always be there to protect against dirty cops?

Do you think the SS has dirty officers?



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by esdad71
I could have easily sued the SPPD after my incident, and filed an IAD report. The officers in question were found guilty of wrong doing, but I did not pursue a civil case becasue justice was served.


Could you elaborate on this a little more please? You could have sued (which I'm assumming you didn't) but the officers were found guilty of wrong doing? By who and what were the charges against them and who made the charges?



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 12:58 PM
link   
esdad71, youn say


If you don't like the way I feel about the Secret Service, you have that choice. However, these men did nothing more than their job.


Do they have carte blanche authority to violate our constitutional rights and deprive us of liberty on the basis of groundless suspicions? Is that their job? When stating a point of view that's critical of an authority figure becomes elevated to reasonable suspicion of criminal activity and probable cause for arrest, then we have indeed gone backwards to the time of the Nazi SS and the Russian KGB.

Mr. Howards' didn't appreciate being detained and questioned for no good reason. You seem to be saying that any reason they give is good enough. Kudos to Mr. Howards for refusing to be a docile mindless lap dog and for focusing attention on this problem.

[edit on 10/16/2006 by dubiousone]



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 01:13 PM
link   

by Griff
Seems you are doing the same thing as you condem some of us as doing. So, you are taking the word of the SS over Howards? By what proof? Remember the 2 sides to every story BS you just spouted



Listen Pal...if you're gonna quote me do it right. I said "if." I have no idea what happened, I was not there. "If" he seemed suspicious...If his side of the story is completely true than they were totally wrong. And typically I do take a law enforcement officer's word over Joe Blow civilian.

But as for flaming people I still can't understand. Why do you get so easily angered. I said nothing personally to you.

People like you come off like the people who attacked the Minutemen when they were lawfully execising their freedom off speech.

PS- dubiousone, yes I do have authority to make that assertion. I work along with law enforcement. "If" someone is disorderly or obstructing an investigation.

[edit on 10/16/2006 by MrMedic]



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 01:16 PM
link   
One last time, yes, the officers were found guilty of bad conduct after an IAD investigation. They were not fired however.

I am not a lapdog, or brainwashed, I think for myself. You don't like my views so you categorize as a specific type of person, which reminds me of a certain gov't mentioned earlier in this thread.

I believe that they did nothing wrong, yet you allow your liberal 'everyone is out to get me' mindset to try to make these men, who were DOING theri job, the bad guys and Mr Howard, who you AGREE with, the innocent. That is where you are wrong. You blindly trust the words of this man. I am simply defending the actions of the agents.

I have also already stated, that if they were found to have done something wrong, they should be punished. I do not think law enforcement should have carte blanche to do what they want.

Man, you guys are really hateful of your own country, and it is sad. Very very sad for you.



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by esdad71

...he was NOT charged with assault, so you may want to change the title of this thread, since it is incorrect. Some of you are responding without reading the article. go figure






From the article:



(Howard said)...then you should arrest me.” ...Which is just what the agent, Virgil D. “Gus” Reichle Jr, proceeded to do.

“He grabbed me and cuffed my hands behind my back in the presence of my eight-year-old son and told me I was being charged with assault of the Vice President,”Howards recalls. ...He says he told the agent, “I can’t abandon my eight-year-old son in a public mall.”

According to Howards, Reichle responded: “We’ll call Social Services.” ...At the jail, the charge against him was reduced to harassment, he says, and he was released on $500 bond. The Eagle County DA’s office eventually dropped that charge.




Howards was accosted publicly, humiliated, cuffed, arrested and taken to jail - his kid was terrorized - the assault charge was dropped to harassment and that charge eventually was dropped.

Which makes it all okay, right?



I don't think so.



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 01:22 PM
link   


Man, you guys are really hateful of your own country, and it is sad. Very very sad for you.


I cant speak for everyone else.....But I love my country.....what I hate is seeing our rights being stolen from us with legislation that is uncostitutional and with a party in power that completly disregards what the constitution says and stands for. I find it amazing when an elected official takes an oath of office they swear to defend and uphold the constitution yet they are passing legislation to gut it.



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 02:14 PM
link   
www.vaildaily.com...

Please read the above article, and let me know if you see it a different way soficrow.


Your quotes are "according to Howard". What is he going to state, that he was happy that he could finally tell that Neocon drunkhunter his piece of mind, and then when he came back to give it again, he was detained. No, he is going to make the evil government agetns out to be the bad guys.

He was foolish to put his child in that situation. I would have never done that. Also, his wife was right there, so I have my doubts as to waht were said. I mean, he was not slammed to the ground or beaten up, he was deemed a threat the the USSS agents took the neccesary 'precautionary' measures.



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrMedic
But as for flaming people I still can't understand. Why do you get so easily angered. I said nothing personally to you.


Sorry if I came accross that I was flaming you. Was not my intention. I'm not angry. I just have had too many run ins with cops and such that have the attitude of "I'm superior than you" and "my word is better than yours". I know it happens all the time. Maybe this SS officer isn't like that...who knows. But the fact is that Howards obviously did nothing wrong or else he would have been charged with something?



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 02:49 PM
link   
I appreciate that Griff...



I totally agree with you in that respect, authority should not be abused. Some of the best cops I work with are the ones that are happy when they have a situation they respond to and are actually happy when things get sorted out and nobody goes to jail.



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 03:06 PM
link   
Those are the good cops. And I do believe there are more good than bad. Just seems that I only run into the bad ones.


Edit: Esdad...I appologize to you also for getting a little fired up there. You have the right to your opinion.

[edit on 10/16/2006 by Griff]



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 03:15 PM
link   
indianalawblog.com...

here is another one you may want to look into. Seems he entered the no-protest zone, however charges were dropped when the judge stated the area was too large. Is it to keep people away, or for protection? You can look at it both ways if you like.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join