Dangerous Times

[KA8NCR]

Again avoiding the overall political discussion, I came across an article on CNN that really troubles me. Actually, the last paragraph bothers me.

It's about some jerk who was fired from his job for heckling Bush during a rally. He deserved to be fired, and he admits it since the company he works for is a public relations firm and _gave_ him the tickets.

The last paragraph though, bothers me. At a Bush rally, two protesters were ARRESTED for wearing anti-Bush shirts. What in the heck is going on in this country?

Obligatory link --> http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/South/08/21/heckler.fired.ap/index.html

[KB1GYQ]

Orwell was twenty years too early.

[N7AAO]

It goes right along with the Kerry campaign threatening to sue TV stations that air the Swift Boat Vets' ad. That is also a restraint of free speech; specifically, the speech of the members of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

Et tu, Brute?

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/unclesam.gif

[K3UD]

Did the barbed wire holding pens for the protestors at the Democratic convention limit free speech? Does Johm Kerry, who is crying to the FEC about the swifties limit free speech? Does the rules concerning protests at abortion clinics limit free speech? Both parties a probably guilty.

As Nat Hentoff put it in his aptly named book on the subject, "Free Speech For Me, But None For Thee".

73
George
K3UD

[KG6JTB]

Typical CNN for not reporting what likely occurred. Re-read the article.

I gather the two protesters were asked to leave, and refused. They were arrested for trespassing, not their shirts or message.

Some of these events are not public events; therefore you can't just protest anywhere you want.

As for the swift-boat guys, when you have a 7:1 ratio of vets who knew Kerry speaking openly and negatively about his record, you have to have questions. Sure, many of these guys probably would have supported Kerry if it weren’t for his remarks to congress after the war.

It's Kerry who decided to make his war record an issue in his campaign, but refuses to release information about his citations.

However, if it's exposed that the swiftys are connected financially to Republican Party, then this could really backfire for the president.

I just hope come November that whoever wins the office of president that the final vote is decisive.

Dave
KG6JTB

[N8CPA]

Action : Reaction :: Behavior : Consequence.

Free Speech means you won't be arrested for your word, not that you won't be fired for your deed. The fellow abused a privilege bestowed by his employer.

There's not enough nfo about the T-shirt brigade for a real assessment. On the surface, the dropped charges only means they won't be prosecuted, not that they didn't tresspass.

[N8CPA]

Quote[/b] (KG6JTB @ Aug. 22 2004,10:04)]Typical CNN for not reporting what likely occurred. Re-read the article.

I gather the two protesters were asked to leave, and refused. They were arrested for trespassing, not their shirts or message.

Some of these events are not public events; therefore you can't just protest anywhere you want.

As for the swift-boat guys, when you have a 7:1 ratio of vets who knew Kerry speaking openly and negatively about his record, you have to have questions. Sure, many of these guys probably would have supported Kerry if it weren’t for his remarks to congress after the war.

It's Kerry who decided to make his war record an issue in his campaign, but refuses to release information about his citations.

However, if it's exposed that the swiftys are connected financially to Republican Party, then this could really backfire for the president.

I just hope come November that whoever wins the office of president that the final vote is decisive.

Dave
KG6JTB
If the connections of the Swifties are such an issue, I suggest the pictures of Michael Moore seated next to Jimmie Carter at the DNC be made as big an issue.

Pot : Kettle :: Black : Black.
Gander : Goose :: Good : Good.

[WB2RJR]

"It goes right along with the Kerry campaign threatening to sue TV stations that air the Swift Boat Vets' ad."N7AAO


No it does not. What Kerry is doing is a restraint on free speach. Every president I know of has had people removed from crowds. Or perhaps it would be better to say that the Secret Service removed them as much for their own safety as for protection of the President. What kind of moron goes to a political rally, filled with whoever's supporters, in opposition looking for trouble. It is not unlikely that the crowd may take matters into its own hands. Ever seen a fight at a football game?

The constitution does not give a person the right to physically meet the President. It may be allowed for persons who know how to properly conduct themselves in public regardless of their political affiliation, but not to possible trouble makers. These people still have the right to express themselves in speech or print.

Like I said the SS has been removing possible trouble makers for as long as I can remember. It is the prudent thing to do. This is a red herring put out by Bush haters. I don't remember them claiming the sky was falling when the SS did this for Clinton.

73, Marty WB2RJR

[N7AAO]

Quote[/b] (WB2RJR @ Aug. 22 2004,07:30)]"It goes right along with the Kerry campaign threatening to sue TV stations that air the Swift Boat Vets' ad."N7AAO


No it does not. What Kerry is doing is a restraint on free speach. Every president I know of has had people removed from crowds. Or perhaps it would be better to say that the Secret Service removed them as much for their own safety as for protection of the President. What kind of moron goes to a political rally, filled with whoever's supporters, in opposition looking for trouble. It is not unlikely that the crowd may take matters into its own hands. Ever seen a fight at a football game?

The constitution does not give a person the right to physically meet the President. It may be allowed for persons who know how to properly conduct themselves in public regardless of their political affiliation, but not to possible trouble makers. These people still have the right to express themselves in speech or print.

Like I said the SS has been removing possible trouble makers for as long as I can remember. It is the prudent thing to do. This is a red herring put out by Bush haters. I don't remember them claiming the sky was falling when the SS did this for Clinton.

73, Marty WB2RJR
If you think I am a Bush hater, you'd better go back and read some of my other political messages.

My point was that the Kerry campaign is not as pure as the driven snow on this issue, much as they'd like everyone to believe they are... they've been the ones that are really trying to stifle free speech, yet all the while claiming that the GOP is.

Typical liberal tactics, but I see no reason for them to get away with them.

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/unclesam.gif

[WB2RJR]

N7AAO,

You wrote, "My point was that the Kerry campaign is not as pure as the driven snow on this issue either..."

Then came back and removed the "either".

Now go up and remove the "also" from your first post here.

"It goes right along with the Kerry campaign threatening to sue TV stations that air the Swift Boat Vets' ad. That is ALSO a restraint of free speech;"

I capped the "also" so you can find it.

Guess you finally figured out my post. Saying someone else is doing the same thing wrong is NOT a defense.

73, Marty WB2RJR

[N7AAO]

Quote[/b] (WB2RJR @ Aug. 22 2004,09:47)]N7AAO,

You wrote, "My point was that the Kerry campaign is not as pure as the driven snow on this issue either..."

Then came back and removed the "either".

Now go up and remove the "also" from your first post here.

"It goes right along with the Kerry campaign threatening to sue TV stations that air the Swift Boat Vets' ad. That is ALSO a restraint of free speech;"

I capped the "also" so you can find it.

Guess you finally figured out my post. Saying someone else is doing the same thing wrong is NOT a defense.

73, Marty WB2RJR
I never said it was a defense. I stand by my statement as written.

[W8EFA]

Quote[/b] (N7AAO @ Aug. 22 2004,06:51)]It goes right along with the Kerry campaign threatening to sue TV stations that air the Swift Boat Vets' ad. That is also a restraint of free speech; specifically, the speech of the members of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

Et tu, Brute?

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/unclesam.gif
No it is not the same. #Kerry's complaint with the Swift idiots are unsubstianted accusations. #Look up the word Libel.

Kerry stood on stage with the actual 15 men he served with. This is just another Bush attack like they did to McCain.

What was discussed originally was possible loss of freedoms when people peacefully (or not) protest.
As usual an issue on free speech turns into an attack on Kerry somehow.

[N7AAO]

So the Swift Vets don't have the right to make their statement in any way they see fit, including air time?

Maybe those Bush protesters should have asked George Soros for some money to put on a TV ad... oh, wait... they already are. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/unclesam.gif

[W8EFA]

Quote[/b] (N7AAO @ Aug. 22 2004,11:03)]So the Swift Vets don't have the right to make their statement in any way they see fit, including air time?

Maybe those Bush protesters should have asked George Soros for some money to put on a TV ad... oh, wait... they already are. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/unclesam.gif
I asked you to look up the world Libel. Look it up

out

[N7AAO]

Quote[/b] (W8EFA @ Aug. 22 2004,11:05)]Quote[/b] (N7AAO @ Aug. 22 2004,11:03)]So the Swift Vets don't have the right to make their statement in any way they see fit, including air time?

Maybe those Bush protesters should have asked George Soros for some money to put on a TV ad... oh, wait... they already are. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/unclesam.gif
I asked you to look up the world Libel. Look it up

out
If it is libel, let him open a lawsuit... the Swift Vets have all made their names public.

Oh, wait, he wouldn't want to do that, because in slander/libel cases, the truth is the best defense... and boy, would the Swift Vets put it all on display. Kerry can't have the truth come out, so he just silences the messengers.

The Kerry campaign has not come out with a single factual rebuttal to their charges... why not? Perhaps because the Swift Vets are speaking the truth?

If it is truly libel, let him sue. If not, let him shut the heck up.

[W8EFA]

The majority of the anger directed at Kerry by these men, come from their disdain for his activities after the war. #For many of these men it’s a personal issue and it’s probable that their personal feelings are causing these attacks based on ATER WAR ACTIVITIES.

The guy leading the Swift vetereans charge said when Kerry got his bravery award for picking up Rasmussen out of the water Kerry was not in danger. #Last week they found that this same Guy had in his report 30 years ago that all the boats were receiving fire.

All I know is that Kerry volunteered, received 2 medals for bravery, received 3 purple hearts, and the 15 men WHO DIRECTLY SERVED UNDER and best know his war time activities stood up for him on the National stage.

In contrast Bush had his daddy get him in the National Guard where he lost his flying priveledges for not showing up for a drug test. #Cheney had something like 9 deferrments as did Ashcroft.

[N7AAO]

Quote[/b] (W8EFA @ Aug. 22 2004,11:56)]All I know is that Kerry volunteered, received 2 medals for bravery, received 3 purple hearts, and the 15 men WHO DIRECTLY SERVED UNDER and best know his war time activities stood up for him on the National stage.
You forgot one thing. Lieutenant Kerry's commanding officer is one of the founding members of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. He should know something about Kerry's service, shouldn't he?

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/unclesam.gif

[ki4bgo]

Quote[/b] (KG6JTB @ Aug. 22 2004,09:04)]Typical CNN for not reporting what likely occurred.
Uh...no it's FOX news that mis-informs, not CNN! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

[N8CPA]

As time permits, I watch Fox, CNN, and MSNBC. They all slant, they all distort.
And in every case, we decide on the basis of which spin resonates most pleasantly with us.

In my case, Laurie Dhue, Kieran Chetry, Heather Nauert, Amy Kellogg, Lauren Greene, and Uma Pemeraju can spin me any way they want! [Please! ] http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

YES! I suggest that the Kerry camp file an OFFICIAL libel suit against ALL the Swift Boat vets!

That's EXACTLY the right way to deal with it.

Why?

becuase it would FORCE the parties to come together in a forum where they would HAVE to raise their hands and swear to the tell the truth.

There would be REQUIRMENETS for BOTH sides to produce records and documents to back up statements.

THIS would FORCE Kerry to provide the military records he REFUSES to allow folks to see.

HMM>.. But I don't see him doing that anytime soon.

So the LIBEL suit will never happen.

Sad.. I - for one - would LIKE to see a full airing of the ACTUAL records from Kerry's service. It would help illuminate the entire issue.

But I expect NOT to see it.

[N7AAO]

Quote[/b] (K3FT @ Aug. 23 2004,04:21)]YES! I suggest that the Kerry camp file an OFFICIAL libel suit against ALL the Swift Boat vets!

That's EXACTLY the right way to deal with it.

Why?

becuase it would FORCE the parties to come together in a forum where they would HAVE to raise their hands and swear to the tell the truth.

There would be REQUIRMENETS for BOTH sides to produce records and documents to back up statements.

THIS would FORCE Kerry to provide the military records he REFUSES to allow folks to see.

HMM>.. But I don't see him doing that anytime soon.

So the LIBEL suit will never happen.

Sad.. I - for one - would LIKE to see a full airing of the ACTUAL records from Kerry's service. It would help illuminate the entire issue.

But I expect NOT to see it.
FT... I wonder, with Kerry's well-publicized complaint to the FCC, perhaps now the Swift Vets can sue the Kerry campaign for libel, and get everything out in the open that way?

Hmmm... interesting idea... ;)

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/unclesam.gif

[W5HTW]

Let me see if I have at least this part of this mess straight:

John Kerry wants his 'issue' to be his Vietnam Service.

John Kerry does not want anyone else's 'issue' to be his (Kerry's) Vietnam Service.

Uh, let me try again:

John Kerry wants to talk about his Vietnam Service.

John Kerry does not want anyone else to talk about his (Kerry's) Vietnam Service. (Don't YOU talk about it. He'll take care of that.)

I think I'm getting close.

John Kerry wants to show what George Bush is doing now, today, to 'ruin the country.'

John Kerry wants Americans to recognize him for his Vietnam service in 1969.

OK, one more try.

John Kerry wants to be recognized as a qualified Commander-in-Chief, based upon his four months in Vietnam, and not his many years afterward of protesting that war.

John Kerry wants GW Bush NOT to be recognized for his already nearly four years as Commander-in-Chief, time that is more current.

Somewhere in there I may be close to the truth, Scully.

Ed

[N7AAO]

Quote[/b] (W5HTW @ Aug. 23 2004,11:38)]Let me see if I have at least this part of this mess straight:

John Kerry wants his 'issue' to be his Vietnam Service. #

John Kerry does not want anyone else's 'issue' to be his (Kerry's) Vietnam Service. #

Uh, let me try again:

John Kerry wants to talk about his Vietnam Service.

John Kerry does not want anyone else to talk about his (Kerry's) Vietnam Service. #(Don't YOU talk about it. #He'll take care of that.)

I think I'm getting close. #

John Kerry wants to show what George Bush is doing now, today, to 'ruin the country.'

John Kerry wants Americans to recognize him for his Vietnam service in 1969. #

OK, one more try.

John Kerry wants to be recognized as a qualified Commander-in-Chief, based upon his four months in Vietnam, and not his many years afterward of protesting that war. #

John Kerry wants GW Bush NOT to be recognized for his already nearly four years as Commander-in-Chief, time that is more current. #

Somewhere in there I may be close to the truth, Scully.

Ed
HTW, how about "all of the above"? Kerry has shown that he can take any position on any issue you want, if you will only promise to vote for him. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/unclesam.gif

[KB9YCO]

Congress shall make no law...abridiging the freedom of speech, or of the press..."

ANYONE that goes against unfettered free speech, for any reason, be it print, broadcast, or otherwise, has a warped vision of what America is truly about. You've got to take the good with the bad in a truly free society; THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS PARTIAL CENCORSHIP! I'm starting to really believe that there's no such thing as honest politics in this country anymore either, if there ever was.

[w6ez]

Quote[/b] (KB9YCO @ Aug. 23 2004,13:50)]Congress shall make no law...abridiging the freedom of speech, or of the press..."

ANYONE that goes against unfettered free speech, for any reason, be it print, broadcast, or otherwise, has a warped vision of what America is truly about. You've got to take the good with the bad in a truly free society; THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS PARTIAL CENCORSHIP! I'm starting to really believe that there's no such thing as honest politics in this country anymore either, if there ever was.
So, would it be ok if you were throwing a private birthday party for your child for some protesters to come to your private child's party, uninvited, and to then start chanting how you child is evil and how birtday parties kill kittens (or what ever) and to do anything they wanted to disrupt your PRIVATE function?

Or should someone be allowed to show up at you mother's funeral wearing tee shirts with her picture on them with inscriptions of how your mother murdered cows by eating meat all the while chanting "meat is murder, meat is murder!" during the funeral services and then throwing red paint on all the people at the funeral.

Now this is true "unfettered free speech" as you call it.

[KB9YCO]

Hmm, interesting and far out extreme scenraios that have little to do with the issue; certainly interesting though, makes ya think mmmkay.
With a private affair on private property, a party or a funeral, free speech would not apply; the same as you don't have the right to say whatever you want on QRZ, or anyone else's website. That's not the same as the government telling private organizations of the FREE press what they can and can't say.
Again, free speech as defined by the Bill Of Rights mean just that, free speech. There aren't exceptions and people that think there are haven't studied American history and don't value their GAURANTEED RIGHTS.