Adam Kokesh Body Slammed for Dancing at Jefferson Memorial

Originally posted by Intelearthling

Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
You fail.

Maybe these people need to go to the Vietnam Memorial and trying dancing and acting a fool.

No soldier is buried there. It's just black granite with 58,000 names inscribed on it in an open area. They won't have to worry about the police there. I guarantee this.

A public library is neither a tomb or memorial. Do you support the rights of these clowns dancing around or the staff that would like to keep order so other patrons can enjoy the atmosphere?

There is a time and place to protest. Forgive me if I'm mistaken but you sound like a Westboro Baptist Church supporter.

edit on 29/5/11 by Intelearthling because: (no reason given)

Veiled insults. I love it. In other words, you have nothing.

Check my post history on WBBC. They are vile and evil, but have a right to freedom of speech and protest.

How ironic that they can protest funerals, but a group can't protest here.

If you feel a right is being violated at the library or the Veteran's Memorial, have at it.

They are public property, and you have every right.

Originally posted by BiGGz
reply to post by OutKast Searcher

 

fact of the matter is, no law was broke. Laws are in place to protect the well-fare and well-being of a person and the public. Dancing in a public area that was built using tax payers money is not against the law in any state. Cops cannot arrest a couple for dancing just because he gave them an unvalid warning. They pose no threat to the public or to the cops life. If our revolutionary fathers seen this....

Cmon, they asked nicely many times and the people were resisting as much as they could. The average American or tourist would have backed off and said, Oh Im sorry, but they were looking for a fight and they got one. Medea plans to go back for more. That shows that it was not just an innocent expression of love and the whole time she was trying to tell that cop that she didn't hear them. What baloney. She is a fake out like I've never seen. This group goes to Egypt to protest. When a group is going around to other countries to foment revolutions, they are no longer in the category of good, upstanding citizen. And from what I understand, they pick their revolutions, as they apparently were not supportive of the one in Iran, but instead chose the ones that wanted to kick out pro-American leaders. Do you think they went to challenge Ahmedinadjad? I tell you nay.

Originally posted by SecretUsername
There is reasons protesting is not allowed inside. You can get 100 people to protest and fill up the inside of that memorial. So then all the visitors who came to see and pay there respects to this memorial would be unable to enter. And what are they trying to do now....? Oh do the same thing again with even more people maybe even filling it up so no visitor can view the memorial. That's just not respectful to other people whom are visiting in my opinion.

Oh those poor Bostonians could not get their tea. Next time two loads of tea might be thrown in the harbor. We have to be respectful of tea drinkers.

Oh those poor white people. Who knows. Next time a hundred black people could show up on the bus, and there would be no room for white people to sit., We have to be respectful of those white people.

There is tons of places to protest and we are so lucky in this country we are allowed to. In other country's you can't protest anywhere. Here we can practically anywhere that won't cause a major disruption to the public and visitors.

Bostoninans should have been thankful they still had coffee and tobacco.

Black people should have been thankful they were even let on the bus to begin with.






Edit: The above was sarcasm, in case anyone decides to pull the ol' race card out of their ass.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


Kind of Like Rosa Parks. Huh.

Kind of like MLK. Huh.

Kind of Like the American Revolutionaries. Huh.

How evil of them.

Originally posted by BiGGz
Hey kid,

Now this is funny!

does it really hurt you and cause a public disturbance when 2 people are slow dancing?

In can't say it does but I can say it does show me the kind of people not willing to abide with rules and regulations set by the parks officials. If they want to slow dance and show affection then they need to go get a room. You may want to say they were in love. I'm in love with my wife and she with me but we're not going to break rules in a public place 'to get attention.' The guy dancing has the profile of a basic trouble-maker. You and I both know these type people. People I'd assume not be around.

Stop defending these atrocious actions.

I not defending atrocicity and never will. The people in the video failed to comply with rules even after the police asked them not to do what they were doing.

Would you defend these people if they started painting graffiti on the walls of the memorial with water-color paint (something that can be washed off easily)? Some people would call this art while others call it freedom of speech. Which catagory do you fall under?

reply to post by Lemon.Fresh

She was there to make a statement, just as Kokesh and his crew were.

SHe was an activist. Not just some random woman.

Rosa Parks was on her way home from work...and was tired...and didn't think she should have to give up her seat just because she was black.

You keep desperately trying to compare this to Rosa Parks...please tell me the injustice these people are standing up for.....dancing???

The people were cited but released. You can find a scanned copy of the citation on a certain FB page, but I can't post the link here.

Offense = "Subject was dancing in a restricted area"
The defendant signed the citation with the signature, "N/A". Classic ...
Charge = 36 CFR 7.96 (g) (1) (i) Info

(g) Demonstrations and special events(1) Definitions. (i) The term demonstrations includes demonstrations, picketing, speechmaking, marching, holding vigils or religious services and all other like forms of conduct which involve the communication or expression of views or grievances, engaged in by one or more persons, the conduct of which has the effect, intent or propensity to draw a crowd or onlookers. This term does not include casual park use by visitors or tourists which does not have an intent or propensity to attract a crowd or onlookers.

Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Kind of Like Rosa Parks. Huh.

Kind of like MLK. Huh.

Kind of Like the American Revolutionaries. Huh.

How evil of them.

It does absolutely no good to argue with those that worship at the feet of authority. They are incapable of seeing the big picture.

If you look at the other youtube vids from that original Video, you will find that they are protesting the fact that stemmed from a flash mob dance at a monument. The court sided with the Park Service and any Demonstration, which now has to include dancing due to the flash mob, "inside" of a monument would be a violation of the new law.

The code pinks there just tried to violate the law, since they don't agree with it. The Park Service was heavy handed but the Code Pinks there were not following their directions and directly disobeying instructions to stop. Just because you think a law isn't right doesn't give your the ability to disregard it without repercussions.

You can't do anything you want inside of a National Monument. Sadly, sides took this to extremes. Flash mobbing a National Monument is probably not a great idea.

Originally posted by whaaa
The sane thing would have been for the cops to have told the dancers to move to an inconspicuous space and dance your hearts out. But no....they love violence and need to push others around in the name of keeping the peace. See the irony here?

Lemon Fresh and I have butted heads in the past but we're united on this unconstitutional infringement on free expression and assembly.

It saddens me to watch the US gradually sink into Fascism. This is just the beginning! But thank GOD for iphones and the www; at least we can record our demise into tyranny.

edit on 29-5-2011 by whaaa because: pt lives!!!

I think this is twice in a month that we have agreed.

WTF is wrong with this picture?

xD


I think internets is part of the problem. We vent it all here, and have no chutzpah to take it to the next level.

If the MSM did their damned jobs, we wouldn't be as screwed as we are now.

Click here for more information.

reply to post by ThreeNF


What?

"holding vigils"

You can't do that at a memorial?

ummm . . . yeah

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


Okay, I was edited out for trying to make a funny and lighten the mood.

Guess I will keep raging.

So you are denying that Rosa Parks was an activist?

She was just a poor tired black woman trying to make her way home.

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher

Originally posted by Konah

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher

And people do have the power to change the government....it is called voting....not breaking laws.

How's that working out for you? Or, for the rest of America for that matter in lieu of the bills passed last Thursday?

Unconstitutional laws do need to be broken, over and over again until they are abolished for good.

Edit to Add: And another thing, our Founding Fathers believed in civil disobedience and dissent, they actually said it was our duty as American citizens. Sometimes you just have to break the law for a larger message to be heard.

edit on 5/29/2011 by Konah because: (no reason given)

It's working out pretty well for me...thanks.


And like I and others have said...I 100% support this law that some people seem to think is wrong. I don't want to see protestors or anything of the sort if I go to visit a memorial.

If I was on vacation with my family...and we picked that day to go to the Jefferson memorial and it was ruined by these idiots...I would be applauding the police for getting them out of there. What "right" do they have to interfere with my visit to the memorial???

Oh yeah? You have no "right" to visit a memorial, while they do have a right to free speech and assembly. That is the difference; the memorial is paid for by we, the people, so our First Amendment right is covered there.

Not to mention the fact that they were dancing in a small space, listening to music through headphones. The only disturbance occurred when the police decided to enforce a law that limits our First Amendment.

If you were on vacation with your family, saw "those idiots" and applauded, you would be just as much as fault as the police.

Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
reply to post by OutKast Searcher

 

Okay, I was edited out for trying to make a funny and lighten the mood.

Guess I will keep raging.

So you are denying that Rosa Parks was an activist?

She was just a poor tired black woman trying to make her way home.

Yes, when she refused to give up her seat...she was just trying to make her way home...she didn't get on that bus to prove a point...it just happened.

She became and activist AFTER that incident.

That was a genuine incident...this "dancing" thing is a staged event. Maybe I'll go rob a bank...just to prove that I'll get arressted...and if I resist...the will use force to restrain me

Well that was traumatizing. I am so afraid of the police now. Oh my god please save me from them!!!

Just like the song from G N' R "Outta Get Me"

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


the day dancing is the same as robbing a bank
is the day the world should just nuke itself

PS I cost the chief of police his job at one point for lying in court and getting busted for it.
if he had just being dancing...
I would have joined him

reply to post by Lemon.Fresh


I didn't see anything specific about dancing in that clause. What I got out of it was any event that would entice a crowd. Couples dancing aren't going to generate a crowd ...

Click here for more information.