Democratic party facism against free speech

Everything you listed/posted here was required by the Secret Service. I was in Boston the other day and the area on the Charles River is reserved for the media and it is going to be protected since there was a specific threat that terrorists might try and target the media during the convention.

The DNC did not request that certain roads in Boston were closed or that certain areas be set up as protest areas, the Secret Service did. If you have a beef, it's with them.

I hold the DNC culpable for failing to protest the repugnant "free-speech zones" outside the convention, which relegate and marginalize dissenting points of view. However, it is not the same thing as actively barring legitimate ticket-holders from entering campaign events and engaging in various forms of protest, like the Bush Administration has infamously done. As far as I know, if you're a lucky convention ticket-holder and want to literally sing praises of the free market and reaganomics, they wouldn't throw you out. (Bush would.) But the DNC should have a stronger voice on this matter since the actions of the city of Boston and the Secret Service directly pertain to the convention. Its inaction reflects a passive acceptance and a disappointing lack of principle.

Good reply.

The police departments of (name any large American city) routinely view dissent against either major political party, or large corporation as criminal behavior, even when protesters are behaving within the law, which is the case 99.9% of the time. More often that not, the police incite violence, and routinely attack people who instinctively defend themselves and get themselves arrested for "assault". Miami 2003 was a particularly bad example of arbitrary police violence. The cops often incite trouble, while the media is waiting on hand to record "rowdy protesters". Miami Police Chief John Timoney is nothing more than a terrorist and a thug, and should be behind bars.

Maybe they are expecting these types to show up?




That guy's all about peacefully expressing his views.

What are you implying scott? Aren't people in your party the overzealous gun nuts, the kind of people that are in organizations that harbor the likes of Timothy McVeigh?

OK remember though you have to watch out for the nutty hippy commie wackos. They'll whip out their flowers and their bandanas and those peacenuts will fuck your shit UP bro!

Nick I think it's spelled fascism. Maybe all this is to protect against terrorist attacks, which would be brought on by Bush invading Iraq and torturing civilians. Pretty much the rest of the world hates us now and if a terrorist attack successfully occurs, it is ultimately Bush's fault. So sayeth the 9/11 commission.

You're not seriously justifying "free-speech zones." Are you?

Why don't you go respond in the thread about the Energy Task Force instead of trolling here?

So the Boston cops are "preparing to arrest 2500".
http://www.boston.com/news/local/mas...rrest_of_2500/
Is this a quota? Something the BPD chief has "requested"? Usually the number of arrests at anti-war demos is frequently ZERO, unless it is special media interest. In Seattle in 1999 and New York 2003, for example "demonstrators" kitted out in masks and "paramilitary" garb to look liken the "black block" start throwing rocks, breaking windows or fighting etc. especially near TV camera crews who of course dutifully record and broadcast the violence for primetime consumption. The "arrests" often turned out to be fake as well; many of the "rioters" in Seattle got visibly hauled off to police stations, but then let go without being charged. Just one of dozens of instances like this happened to some friends of mine working for an independent media group. They tried to interview one of these stooges carrying an anti-WTO placard who was exiting the rear of a downtown Seattle police station chatting animatedly to 3 SPD officers.... on putting the mic up to this guy's face, the cops grabbed their video rig, ejected the tape, stomped on it then threw the camera on the sidewalk, arrested the cameraman and the girl with the mic. The "demonstrator" who was by then laughing and saying "suckers", got into a police car with one of the SPD officers and roared off. My friends were charged with "assaulting a police officer" and were kept in jail for two days whereupon the cops dropped the charges and released them. Their $7500 videocam was destroyed however. Now, however they have added a more subtle tactic: instead of going to the trouble of just publicly tarnishing dissent, they have designated "first amendment zones" at visible events, where you can protest to your heart's content, but nobody will know about it. It givethe stooges a break from having to destroy property and beat people up.

You are upset about this one instance where security was a real concern, yet applaud the continuos violation of free speech rights everywhere the current pResident goes. Don't be a hypocrit, you know it is not the same. Now you know how it feels what people other than republicans have been feeling since January 2001.

Deal with it.