This video shows just how far Obama is willing to go to shred the US Constitution.
During a Obama rally at the University of Texas, John Bush was arrest on charges of trespassing on an open campus.
He was abridged his freedom of speech, his right of the people peaceably to assemble and his freedom of the press.
All of this happened outside of Obama's speech on UT campus.
Is this the beginning of the end of the political party known as the Democrats?
I think you'll know my answer!
10 comments:
I just put this on my blog. We need to pass this arround. This is scary stuff brother. It's just a matter of time before they arrest us for protesting at Tea Parties.
I was shocked at this video and just how blatant a violation to the 1st this was.... It's going to get ugly, Chris, before it gets better.
Be prepared, ALWAYS my friend!
wow, people have been arrested for this during every single one of the Republican presidents in my lifetime. What is wrong with you guys. Its not Obama's fault. He didn't make the police do it during Busdh 41's time in office so who was to blame then.
once again taking something simple and unrelated to the President and making a illusionary mole hill out of it.
When Bush came to the Pittsburgh area on Labor Day 2002, 65-year-old retired steel worker Bill Neel was there to greet him with a sign proclaiming, “The Bush family must surely love the poor, they made so many of us.” The local police, at the Secret Service’s behest, set up a “designated free-speech zone” on a baseball field surrounded by a chain-link fence a third of a mile from the location of Bush’s speech. The police cleared the path of the motorcade of all critical signs, though folks with pro-Bush signs were permitted to line the president’s path. Neel refused to go to the designated area and was arrested for disorderly conduct; the police also confiscated his sign. Neel later commented, “As far as I’m concerned, the whole country is a free speech zone. If the Bush administration has its way, anyone who criticizes them will be out of sight and out of mind.”
At Neel’s trial, police detective John Ianachione testified that the Secret Service told local police to confine “people that were there making a statement pretty much against the president and his views” in a so-called free speech area. Paul Wolf, one of the top officials in the Allegheny County Police Department, told Salon that the Secret Service “come in and do a site survey, and say, ‘Here’s a place where the people can be, and we’d like to have any protesters put in a place that is able to be secured.’” Pennsylvania district judge Shirley Rowe Trkula threw out the disorderly conduct charge against Neel, declaring, “I believe this is America. Whatever happened to ‘I don’t agree with you, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it’?”Similar suppressions have occurred during Bush visits to Florida. A recent St. Petersburg Times editorial noted, “At a Bush rally at Legends Field in 2001, three demonstrators—two of whom were grandmothers—were arrested for holding up small handwritten protest signs outside the designated zone. And last year, seven protesters were arrested when Bush came to a rally at the USF Sun Dome. They had refused to be cordoned off into a protest zone hundreds of yards from the entrance to the Dome.” One of the arrested protesters was a 62-year-old man holding up a sign, “War is good business. Invest your sons.” The seven were charged with trespassing, “obstructing without violence and disorderly conduct.”
Police have repressed protesters during several Bush visits to the St. Louis area as well. When Bush visited on Jan. 22, 2003, 150 people carrying signs were shunted far away from the main action and effectively quarantined. Denise Lieberman of the ACLU of Eastern Missouri commented, “No one could see them from the street. In addition, the media were not allowed to talk to them. The police would not allow any media inside the protest area and wouldn’t allow any of the protesters out of the protest zone to talk to the media.” When Bush stopped by a Boeing plant to talk to workers, Christine Mains and her five-year-old daughter disobeyed orders to move to a small protest area far from the action. Police arrested Mains and took her and her crying daughter away in separate squad cars.
http://www.amconmag.com/article/2003/dec/15/00012/
Somehow you freedom fighters missed all the first amendment rights disappearing under Bush 43. Maybe you didn't care if it was liberals rights? Perhaps Chicken little has some idea why its such a big deal now.
Joe, the time for Bush is OVER... Get over it. This is Obamas show.
And I think "people have been arrested for this during every single one of the Republican presidents" Is a very drastic over statement, on your part.
"was arrested for disorderly conduct" there you go, secret service tells you to move, move.
This situation from the video above came from one of the schools administrators who didn't want this guy, with Press credentials near the auditorium. This guy was arrested for trespassing... On an open public University, no less.
And so to blaming Obama is just. It's that kind of mindset he has instilled in to loony libs, that you can't say what you want about him. You can't peaceably assemble, or even report without Whitehouse Press credentials. (in their mind)
It was wrong for this school to take matters in to their own hands. I wonder if the SS had a problem with this guy, or was it the libs running our public universities who feel empowered.
Mark, your wrong on both accounts.
Mark, the problem you and other conservatives have is that nothing is equal. I'm not bashing Bush 43, Clinton or even Bush 41, i'm just establishing that at events of this nature the presidents of past and present have had the same thing go on. Nothing new is happening and therefore Obama can't be doing anything any more heinous than any other president.
You need to look at the reality instead of partisanship. Free speech zones exist at most presidential speeches, town halls etc. Protesters are asked to stay in them. If not they are arrested. Its been happening for as long as i have lived. Nothing nefarious there.
As for a press pass, thats nothing. Press credentials don't have any legal standing. If you are invovled in the protest and judging by his video he says he was then he violated the rules and is subject to the law. Unless he was given clearance by the university, which is an actual press pass and not just credentials then he was wrong.
Can't you and Chris try to be even-handed? Stop throwing shit at the wall, cuz it don't stick.
By the way the stories came from a conservative source criticising Bush, not a lib one.
Joe, I have yet to see from past presidents "Free Speech Zones". If there have been, its wrong. And a clear violation of freedom of speech.
Now if there were "security" zones, those are legal, to protect the President, which I agree with.
In this matter, based on the fact provided, talking with other people and gathering information for even writing an article can not be denied unless that person does not wish to take questions nor feel compelled to answer them.
Only thing out there that I have found is he had a press pass and writes for the University paper. So, based on that, he has clearance to walk the grounds of the University and talk, ask questions and so forth. Unless he has not been given clearance by the Secret Service to be with in a security zone deemed by the SS for journalist.
Funny, no supporters of Obama, that were with John Bush was arrested, just John. They were outside the "Free Speech zone".... wonder why?
Mark, there have been "Free Speech Zones" for other presidents and at College campus's for 30 years. The story i posted from American Conservative explains this and shows what happens when protesters stepped out of such zones at Bush events.
As for why no supporters were arrested, its simple if not basically wrong, they were supporters. Free Speech zones are for protesters not supporters. Not that its right, but thats how they work now and during the other recent presidents too.
Its not a partisan thing at all.
I have never heard them called free speech zones in my life time, up until lately, but I must remind you of what I said... 'ANYONE using "Free Speech Zone" is in violation of the 1st amendment.'
Security buffer or zone is what I have heard them called in the past...
And you must have me confused with someone who agreed with Bush on every issue.
I have never made that claim, so don't assume anything, Joe.
Now getting back to the present.....
So what you are saying is persons who protests have only this (example) 10x10 area they can speak in. But supports of Obama can go and speak anywhere JOE?
That’s a perfect example of sequestering free speech.
Like I've said, socialist thru and thru.
Come on Nov
Post a Comment