CADsortaGUY
Lifer
That doesn't set any line. Nice try but you aren't going to be able to keep the sliding scale option.
CsG
That doesn't set any line. Nice try but you aren't going to be able to keep the sliding scale option.
CsG
Frankly, I don't see how wearing a t-shirt, no matter what it says, can be deemed a threat to security.
This is (yet another) clear cut case of stifling dissent and punishing anyone who has a viewpoint considered unacceptable by Bush and his handlers. I'm sure the SS are given orders to arrest & remove anyone that shows any indication of deviating from the party line. And of course, all of this meshes nicely with the ongoing theme of Bush appearances in which only the party faithful are allowed to attend. Whether that means signing loyalty oaths or undergoing scrutiny by security and being bounced if any anti-Bush sentiment pops up on the radar.
It's a scary thing to see happening in America. You would think Bush would have an open door policy when it comes to political events, that he would welcome a discussion with those who may not agree, perhaps it would offer him an opportunity to explain his policies in an open environment where all are welcome. Instead, Bush chooses to preach to the choir -- I'm sure he's winning over lots of swing voters that way. :roll:
Nice to see Cad flailing around and defending it though. I would expect no less.
This is (yet another) clear cut case of stifling dissent and punishing anyone who has a viewpoint considered unacceptable by Bush and his handlers. I'm sure the SS are given orders to arrest & remove anyone that shows any indication of deviating from the party line. And of course, all of this meshes nicely with the ongoing theme of Bush appearances in which only the party faithful are allowed to attend. Whether that means signing loyalty oaths or undergoing scrutiny by security and being bounced if any anti-Bush sentiment pops up on the radar.
It's a scary thing to see happening in America. You would think Bush would have an open door policy when it comes to political events, that he would welcome a discussion with those who may not agree, perhaps it would offer him an opportunity to explain his policies in an open environment where all are welcome. Instead, Bush chooses to preach to the choir -- I'm sure he's winning over lots of swing voters that way. :roll:
Nice to see Cad flailing around and defending it though. I would expect no less.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Again, where is your proof that it was their t-shirts that caused them to be arrested? Are you sure there was NOTHING else? You know this how? Exactly - you don't. You all base this on your preconceived(and faulty) notion that Bush is evil and is "attacking" dissent.
Yeah, it's great to see the Bush haters tossing out their wild-eyed accusations that we've all come to expect here. I'll wait for you all to draw the line...ofcourse I won't be holding my breath.
CsG
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Again, where is your proof that it was their t-shirts that caused them to be arrested? Are you sure there was NOTHING else? You know this how? Exactly - you don't. You all base this on your preconceived(and faulty) notion that Bush is evil and is "attacking" dissent.
Yeah, it's great to see the Bush haters tossing out their wild-eyed accusations that we've all come to expect here. I'll wait for you all to draw the line...ofcourse I won't be holding my breath.
CsG
<ahem>
Duh Cad, read the account as posted:Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Again, where is your proof that it was their t-shirts that caused them to be arrested? Are you sure there was NOTHING else? You know this how? Exactly - you don't. You all base this on your preconceived(and faulty) notion that Bush is evil and is "attacking" dissent.
Yeah, it's great to see the Bush haters tossing out their wild-eyed accusations that we've all come to expect here. I'll wait for you all to draw the line...ofcourse I won't be holding my breath.
CsG
I'm basing my opinion on the FACTS as presented in the article. If YOU have information that says they were arrested for something other than wearing anti-Bush t-shirts then by all means, come forth with it. Otherwise, this is a clear-cut case of the SS being ordered to arrest/jail anyone who shows any degree of dissent or anti-Bush sentiment.
Christ Cad, show us how there was "something else" that got this couple arrested -- go ahead, back up your own wild-eyed claims. Of course, you can't, can you?
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Again, where is your proof that it was their t-shirts that caused them to be arrested? Are you sure there was NOTHING else? You know this how? Exactly - you don't. You all base this on your preconceived(and faulty) notion that Bush is evil and is "attacking" dissent.
Yeah, it's great to see the Bush haters tossing out their wild-eyed accusations that we've all come to expect here. I'll wait for you all to draw the line...ofcourse I won't be holding my breath.
CsG
<ahem>
Exactly my point. You don't know if they were arrested for their shirts of if it was because of them sitting down - OR their refusal to obey an officer. You want to only focus on what their shirt said but that may or may not be the case.
I think I know what happened here as it could happen on tuesday if Bowfinger has the balls to show up. These people tried to get into an supporter invite event wearing anti-Bush shirts.
You see, that is a common tactic of the protesters, the try to hide the shirts/signs and then get inside the event and start yelling and screaming. It's happened many times and we've come up with a solution to that problem. Why cover the shirts if they were just trying to hear the other side. Exactly.:roll:
The staff refused entry and when they refused to leave the cops were called in to remove them from the event. The cops would give them the same options as the staff(removing the shirts or leaving) Now when they did neither -they were removed and arrested. THAT is a likely scenario given what I have been told. You see, I was on goon patrol(checking people to make sure hecklers didn't get in) during the Cheney event and we had the power to ask people to remove offending signs/shirts/whatever or else deny them entrance to the event. We were specifically told that we couldn't physically remove these sorts of people and that the police would have to be the ones to do so. The police will remove those who do not obey.
So anyway - the FACTS are that you don't have all the facts and details but yet you all want to blame this on Bush "attacking" dissent.
Pffttt You guys are a quite a treat. Come on Bow - show up tuesday with an anti-bush shirt and ask for me. I'll show you the procedure and you can take it as far as you wish - I'm sure you won't be the only one who will attempt to get in. CsG
Quite clearly, it's all about the shirt. Why bother hassling/arresting these people if they aren't doing anything disruptive? Like you said, as soon as any visible or audible dissent is displayed, bam you're out. Even your own story supports that Bush and his goons (and I guess by extension that means you) tolerate no differing opinions.
Case closed.
Case closed.
They were singled out because of their shirts. Had they been wearing Bush-fan shirts, they'd have had no problems. But, because they wore anti-Bush shirts, they were harrassed by the police and acted defensively and in line with their First Amendment rights.Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Again, where is your proof that it was their t-shirts that caused them to be arrested? Are you sure there was NOTHING else? You know this how? Exactly - you don't. You all base this on your preconceived(and faulty) notion that Bush is evil and is "attacking" dissent.
Yeah, it's great to see the Bush haters tossing out their wild-eyed accusations that we've all come to expect here. I'll wait for you all to draw the line...ofcourse I won't be holding my breath.
CsG
<ahem>
Exactly my point. You don't know if they were arrested for their shirts of if it was because of them sitting down - OR their refusal to obey an officer. You want to only focus on what their shirt said but that may or may not be the case.
I think I know what happened here as it could happen on tuesday if Bowfinger has the balls to show up. These people tried to get into an supporter invite event wearing anti-Bush shirts.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
And like I said - the likely chain of events was that the staff refused entrance(ripped up their ticket) because they wouldn't remove the shirts. The reason the police became involved is because they refused to leave or remove the shirts. It's exactly how things will go down if Bowfinger tries to get in wearing an anti-Bush shirt on Tuesday
It has NOTHING to do with free speech and everything to do with their refusal to leave. "harassed by the police":roll: come on conjur - you know better than that. Try actually thinking about this for once. I worked an event making sure people like that didn't get in(because it's a known tactic for hecklers/protesters - we've seen their instructions!
) This is classic because they make a big media stink about their "rights" when they were trying to disturb the event. If you really believe they weren't going to cause a scene inside...I have a bridge to sell you...CsG
Why don't you just drive over to Bowfinger's house and pre-emptively arrest him for crimes you know he will commit? I mean, you're so hot to "take him down" or whatever, you may as well just get it over with.
PS: SHIRT! :|
PS: SHIRT! :|
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Hehe, no. The event staff most likely refused entrance - which is NOT the police or the SS doing anything based on politics. The police/SS would only get involved if a person refuses to leave because they can no longer gain access to the event(removal of their ticket). This isn't about differing opinions - this is about know tactics by the protesters/hecklers to create a scene. It happened in Davenport once - It's not going to happen here. This was nothing but a good catch by the campaign volunteers(most likely) and the police got involved when they wouldn't leave etc.
Yes, case closed - there was no Bush "attack on dissent". Bowfinger can come try if you all don't believe me.
CsG
What if the shirt said 'I am going to assassinate President Bush with the gun hiding under my shirt'?
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
The campaign didn't arrest them. They were removed most likely due to their refusal to leave an event they weren't allowed entrance to. Hint: the police don't care about the shirts - just like the SS doesn't care.
Sheesh. Are you all really that naive? or do you just think everyone else is?
Come try it out - you'll see I'm right.
CsG
Cad -- here's a hypothetical for you: What if the couple wore the shirts but created no scene. What if they just sat there quietly doing nothing but listening and keeping to themselves. The entire "rally" or whatever passed uneventfully. What basis do you have for tearing up their tickets and removing them from the location at that point?
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
And like I said - the likely chain of events was that the staff refused entrance(ripped up their ticket) because they wouldn't remove the shirts. The reason the police became involved is because they refused to leave or remove the shirts. It's exactly how things will go down if Bowfinger tries to get in wearing an anti-Bush shirt on Tuesday
It has NOTHING to do with free speech and everything to do with their refusal to leave. "harassed by the police":roll: come on conjur - you know better than that. Try actually thinking about this for once. I worked an event making sure people like that didn't get in(because it's a known tactic for hecklers/protesters - we've seen their instructions!
CsG
Yes, they were harrassed. They were standing in an area right next to other audience members and were singled out solely because of their t-shirts. That's not harrassment?
:roll:
It's disgusting how you defend this illegal and immoral act.
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
And like I said - the likely chain of events was that the staff refused entrance(ripped up their ticket) because they wouldn't remove the shirts. The reason the police became involved is because they refused to leave or remove the shirts. It's exactly how things will go down if Bowfinger tries to get in wearing an anti-Bush shirt on Tuesday
It has NOTHING to do with free speech and everything to do with their refusal to leave. "harassed by the police":roll: come on conjur - you know better than that. Try actually thinking about this for once. I worked an event making sure people like that didn't get in(because it's a known tactic for hecklers/protesters - we've seen their instructions!
CsG
Why should they have to remove their shirts?
If someone asked me to remove my shirt, unless it was something like "I hate n!ggers!, "Jews are scum", "I'm going to massacre Muslims", I would not do it.
There is no justifiable reason for asking someone to remove their shirt, and from all accounts (including the damned Mayor), they were arrested after refusing to remove their shirts, and then sitting down.
I would not obey a police officer if they told me to do something like remove my shirt, unless they had reasonable grounds (like they suspected I had a weapon), but then they could do a pat down, if necessary.
Oh, and
THEY WERE ALLOWED T-SHIRTS!
Refusing entry for T-shirts, non-prohibited items, would be unreasonable, so I am not suprised if they did refure to remove their shirts.
This is NOT their fault, but the fault of the staff, if your situation is correct. They did nothing wrong, why should they be punished?
If they did cause a disruption, it was NOT intentional, if they were asked (unreasonably) to do something, such as remove their non-prohibited shirts.
Let me guess, the Mayor is telling bullsh!t too? Do you think he's in on the conspiracy?
<- wait, he's not with them
Yet he says they were there and did nothing wrong (unless refusing to take a NON-PROHIBITED T-shirt off is wrong, somehow.)
So CsG, what did they do wrong? Refuse to strip for police? The police could have said they were under suspicion for something, like concealed weapons, but wouldn't a pat down be more appropriate?
Wouldn't such a high security even have scanners of sorts? (I don't kno, I live in the UK, so your security may be different to ours, and I've not beeen to a political rally).
The issue is, was it reasonable to ask them to remove or cover their shirts.
Bowfinger
Lifer
- Nov 17, 2002
- 15,776
- 392
- 126
The only thing "closed" here is your mind. Your continual denial of the most fundamental facts of this incident shows that you not only drank the Bush Kool-Aid, you're swimming in it. It is an attack on dissent, case closed. The Ranks attended a taxpayer-funded event held on public property. They had legitimate tickets, they were already inside, and their one and only "crime" was peacefully, lawfully wearing anti-Bush shirts. All of your twists and diversions and rationalizations don't change this a whit. (You'd know this if you bothered to educate yourself about the incident, but that would mean opening your mind to possible criticisms of your deity in the White House.)Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Hehe, no. The event staff most likely refused entrance - which is NOT the police or the SS doing anything based on politics. The police/SS would only get involved if a person refuses to leave because they can no longer gain access to the event(removal of their ticket). This isn't about differing opinions - this is about know tactics by the protesters/hecklers to create a scene. It happened in Davenport once - It's not going to happen here. This was nothing but a good catch by the campaign volunteers(most likely) and the police got involved when they wouldn't leave etc.
Yes, case closed - there was no Bush "attack on dissent". Bowfinger can come try if you all don't believe me.
CsG
I was appalled as I read your posts this morning. It's no wonder you don't see the problem; you're part of it. You were positively bursting with pride at getting to help trample the First Amendment. It's shameful Cad, and it's 100% contrary to America's founding principles.
Re. your cult meeting next Tuesday, I have zero interest in attending. I got my fill of bleating at the Fair last week; you'd enjoy the Sheep Barn. As far as you and your patrol of goons are concerned, while I'm sure it's a fine show, I prefer the original German version. It's less hyporcritical.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
:roll: No, it's not an illegal or immoral act and it most likely wasn't done by the police or the SS. Sort of puts that little "attack on dissent" accusation to bed though.
********
DM - They are more than welcome to come see the President but they aren't welcome if they want to cause a scene. These people obviously had more planned if they were hiding their anti-Bush t-shirts under other cloths. It's been tried many times before, but they are no longer going to be able to ruin events.
********
Lonyo- Yes there is. This was an invite only event, and we will allow those who have tickets to enter if they pass political security.
Now ofcourse these people didn't have to remove their shirts and that's what they chose - but they should have left. They were most likely given the option of either many times, and we know which path they chose.
Now again since you don't seem to understand. They had offending shirts on and most likely the staff gave them the option of removal or leaving. WHICH IS NOT UNREASONABLE. This is an event by invite only and they have to follow the rules just like everyone else. When they most likely refused both -the police were brought in - just like is supposed to happen since campaign staff/volunteers can't physically remove people. When the police arrive they will give them the same option as the staff did. When they refuse to obey the police(who don't give a rats ass about their politics) and sit down will be hauled off. So no, I don't see where you get this idea that the Mayor is in on something. What he said is just fine and doesn't refute the likely scenario I've put forth.
*sigh* No, most likely they were arrested because of their decision to not obey the police who were brought in when the staff refused them entrance. No, REMOVAL is the only option. You see, there was a moveon.org goon that infiltrated an event in Davenport I believe. He did the shirt trick and started yelling and screaming after removing his outer shirt when the speech started. These people have known guidelines and suggestions...and don't pretend they don't. It's FACT.
************
Umm no Bowfinger. It is not an attack on dissent - it's removing troublemakers and don't kid yourself -they weren't there to see the other side when they wear "hate Bush" shirts. Are you really that naive? It seems you are. You see, these political events are paid for by the campaign and it is a invite only one. These people clearly did not support the President or were not "undecided" - which is who the tickets are for. The tickets are NOT for you and your moveon.org goons to disrupt speeches or events. It's shameful that you condone such deceitful actions like these people hiding their shirts to present a false appearance.
Yeah, I figured you wouldn't have the balls to show up show I could show you that my scenario is probably the most likely event scenario. You just want to bleat about free-speech but you have no respect for a private event. People who don't follow the rules don't get into the events - period. There people did not want to follow the rules and now they are whining - which is exactly what they were trying to do in the first place - cause a scene. Either they get inside and start bleating some anti-Bush BS or they whine to the press when they are removed because of their refusal to follow the rules. This has nothing to do with the police or SS but it's clear you don't want to see reality and only want to live in your hate filled dream land. The police are there to remove asshats who cause problems - these people caused a problem when they didn't follow the rules. Most likely they were arrested because they wouldn't obey the police or whatever but their arrest wasn't because of their shirt - it was because of their actions(or lack there of).
You can try to call names all you want but you are trying to claim this is something that it is not. YOU aren't the arbiter of free-speech and just because you want to claim it's their free-speech right to not follow the rules to get into a private invite only event -doesn't make it so. You really should try to do something about your hate - it can't be healthy to carry around such rage. So anyway, call names and post flames all you wish there tough E-guy.
CsG
You see Cad ... The sad, sad fact of this incident is that these people were expelled and arrested for ONE REASON ONLY: their choice of t-shirts and the message upon them. Where you went wrong, and I guess I don't blame you because you're merely following Bush's lead here, is that you would pre-emptively expell/arrest these individuals on the mere assumption that they were going to create a disturbance by heckling or otherwise disrupting the event. Actions they haven't done yet and nobody knows if they will actually do.
Hell Cad, why don't you bust out the precogs and have people arrested for future crimes while you're at it?
Hell Cad, why don't you bust out the precogs and have people arrested for future crimes while you're at it?
Steeplerot
Lifer
- Mar 29, 2004
- 13,051
- 6
- 81
Seems more rally-crashing is needed.
Cad has it pretty easy it seems.
Homemade tear gas seems to be all the rage nowdays where was this rally at?
Pretty tame.
Bowfinger
Lifer
- Nov 17, 2002
- 15,776
- 392
- 126
Cad, you're going to keep looking like a fool until you bother to actually educate yourself about this incident. Even reading our replies would help, since you keep repeating disinformation that we've already corrected again and again.
It was done by the local police. According to the Republican mayor, they were told to do so by the Secret Service. Charges were later dismissed.
You have no basis for claiming the Ranks had anything else "planned". Your continuing assertions they did are paranoid nonsense. You cannot arrest people for something you think they may do. No one involved with this case has alleged they were causing a disturbance of any sort. They were approached solely because of their shirts. Give it up.
More examples of you treating your assumptions and suspicions as fact. They were already inside. They were not causing a disturbance. As I understand it, it was not an invite-only event. Tickets were "distributed by various employers in the area" according to the first article.
You're right in that it was a campaign event. As I've already pointed out at least twice, however, this campaign event was taxpayer-funded and held on public property. I even bolded it for you last time.<UL>
"Organizers described it as a presidential visit, not a political rally. State and federal funds were used to pay for the presidential visit."</ul>
Did you get it this time? Educate yourself. Your assumptions are no substitute for facts.
(One final note. You love to bluster about others' hate. I think you should talk to Moonbeam about his mirror. The hate I see is yours, tromping around in your jack boots, attacking anyone who dares question your feckless leader.)
WRONG
It was done by the local police. According to the Republican mayor, they were told to do so by the Secret Service. Charges were later dismissed.
WRONG
You have no basis for claiming the Ranks had anything else "planned". Your continuing assertions they did are paranoid nonsense. You cannot arrest people for something you think they may do. No one involved with this case has alleged they were causing a disturbance of any sort. They were approached solely because of their shirts. Give it up.
WRONG
More examples of you treating your assumptions and suspicions as fact. They were already inside. They were not causing a disturbance. As I understand it, it was not an invite-only event. Tickets were "distributed by various employers in the area" according to the first article.
WRONG
You're right in that it was a campaign event. As I've already pointed out at least twice, however, this campaign event was taxpayer-funded and held on public property. I even bolded it for you last time.<UL>
"Organizers described it as a presidential visit, not a political rally. State and federal funds were used to pay for the presidential visit."</ul>
Did you get it this time? Educate yourself. Your assumptions are no substitute for facts.
What's shameful is your willingness to trample the First Amendment so a public servant isn't accidently burdened with the knowledge that not everyone worships him like you do. In case you missed American Government, Bush works for all of us, NOT just his wealthy base.
WRONG! WRONG! WRONG! I strongly encourage you to educate yourself before posting again. Your disinformation and absurd assumptions are pathetic.
(One final note. You love to bluster about others' hate. I think you should talk to Moonbeam about his mirror. The hate I see is yours, tromping around in your jack boots, attacking anyone who dares question your feckless leader.)
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Wrong wrong wrong and WRONG. These people were hiding anti-Bush shirts, but that is NOT why there were arrested. They may not have been let into the event because of the shirts but the Police nor the SS singled them out because of that. They were asked by the police - yes, but that doesn't the police were the ones who found the shirts. You guys are real pieces of work.
Bowfinger- I suggest you try looking at this from here in reality - not your hate-Bush at all costs world. There is no "hate" on my part. I don't hate those morons who tried to hide who they really were to try to heckle the President - but I will do whatever is appropriate within the law to make sure that they don't make it into the event to ruin it for everyone else.
DM - Like I said, I don't doubt the reason they were singled out was because they were trying to hide the shirts. But that wasn't why they were arrested and it most likely wasn't the SS or the police who spotted the shirts as I've pointed out. I never said they should be arrested pre-emptively but they can and will be stopped from entering the event if they refuse to follow the rules. So anyway your asinine ASSumption that this is about stiffling free-speech by pre-emptive arrest is bogus.
Monkey - doesn't matter. If you needed tickets - it wasn't a "public" event. And anyway - it wouldn't change matters anyway. If these people really were just trying to hear the President why did they try to hide their shirts? Why didn't they follow the rules? Why didn't they obey the police when they got involved? Exactly - this was a "win"-"win" for them. They could either get into the event and then disrupt it from there or as it now turns out - they can create this bogus free-speech whine fest.
Hope you have the balls to show up on Tuesday Bowfinger. I'd be glad to educate you personally on how this all works.
CsG
You guys are real pieces of work.Bowfinger- I suggest you try looking at this from here in reality - not your hate-Bush at all costs world. There is no "hate" on my part. I don't hate those morons who tried to hide who they really were to try to heckle the President - but I will do whatever is appropriate within the law to make sure that they don't make it into the event to ruin it for everyone else.
DM - Like I said, I don't doubt the reason they were singled out was because they were trying to hide the shirts. But that wasn't why they were arrested and it most likely wasn't the SS or the police who spotted the shirts as I've pointed out. I never said they should be arrested pre-emptively but they can and will be stopped from entering the event if they refuse to follow the rules. So anyway your asinine ASSumption that this is about stiffling free-speech by pre-emptive arrest is bogus.
Monkey - doesn't matter. If you needed tickets - it wasn't a "public" event. And anyway - it wouldn't change matters anyway. If these people really were just trying to hear the President why did they try to hide their shirts? Why didn't they follow the rules? Why didn't they obey the police when they got involved? Exactly - this was a "win"-"win" for them. They could either get into the event and then disrupt it from there or as it now turns out - they can create this bogus free-speech whine fest.
Hope you have the balls to show up on Tuesday Bowfinger. I'd be glad to educate you personally on how this all works.
CsG
LMAO, Sticks and stones may break my bones....
Seriously, you think you can control what a tshirt says like they were kids in school? Grow up boys and learn to play nice.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 20K
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter