Terrorism charges lodged against protesters. Go PATRIOT ACT!

[Juan_Bottom]

Terrorism charges lodged against protesters at GOP convention
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washing ... sters.html

Bush To Criminalize Protesters Under Patriot Act As Disruptors
http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article/1401 ... disruptors

Minnesota Chapter of National Lawyers Guild
http://www.dhafirtrial.net/2008/09/03/r ... s-acts-of/

Ok, this makes me swear out loud. Now protesting is punishable as an act of terrorism? What the crap is this crap?

[Juan_Bottom]

I should also like to point out that these "terrorists" didn't actually do anything. The police used PAID INFORMANTS to help them get warrents. The police then went to these organisers homes and arrested them. They are being charged as terrorists......for thought crimes.

[MeDeFe]

Start a group that plans to protest during the trials if it goes that far. It could be the ultimate snowballing effect, when you're on trial for having been disruptive you will have your group of protesters and so on and so on.

But seriously, you people on the western edge of the Atlantic are screwed, and have been for a long time already.

[jonesthecurl]

I should also like to point out that these "terrorists" didn't actually do anything. The police used PAID INFORMANTS to help them get warrents. The police then went to these organisers homes and arrested them. They are being charged as terrorists......for thought crimes.

ON no evidence. with no previous record. despite being goaded by agent-provocateurs.

[Jenos Ridan]

Sounds like a more extreme verison of the Alien and Sedition Act (still on the books, last I checked), which I'd be all to happy to use to [img]

Code: Select all

throw%20these%20conniving%20creeps%20into%20prison

http://images.usatoday.com/news/_photos/2006/02/24/in-funeral.jpg[/img]

[img]

Code: Select all

And%20these...

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://americansfortruth.com/uploads/2007/10/fred_phelps_idiotic_911_message.bmp&imgrefurl=http://www.comflm.com/sundayviewscommentarynews/id7.html&h=303&w=400&sz=356&hl=en&start=3&usg=__bWyf9RP6u988kFB6GD82dgM0Pzk=&tbnid=4z5Cu9J8QpMwaM:&tbnh=94&tbnw=124&prev=/images%3Fq%3DThank%2BGod%2Bfor%2BIEDs%26gbv%3D2%26hl%3Den[/img]

........you get the idea, heartless people.

[gdeangel]

Let's not forget this part:

RNC Welcoming Committee is a self-described anarchist group that has worked for months planning disruptions at the convention. Police blamed the group for sparking violence during Monday's antiwar protest in St. Paul. Although most of the estimated 10,000 people at the march were peaceful, police say a splinter group of about 200 people harassed delegates, smashed windows and started at least one fire.

.

So some folks are really emotional about Bush, the war, etc. Do you not think it possible that they planned to "scare the bad guys" with terrorist tactics. Because let me remind you that terrorism isn't about just killing people. It's about killing, beating, intimidating by other means as well. Non-violent protest is part of the right to free speech. Destroying property and assaulting people out of individual anger, emotion, or personal animosity is a simple crime. Doing those things for the political purpose of depriving other people of their freedom is terrorism. And yes, conspiracy and attempt is a crime, but I doubt it was just "thoughts". When you go out to protest non-violently at an event where a few misguided militants in your group talked seriously about bringing malitovs, for example, and then they show up and start a violent conflict, that's probably conspiracy by even the non-violent guys because the crowd enabled the militant to do the terrorism with the prospect of anonymity and getting away.

This is an emerging area of legal thinking. Part of it happens on the front lines of the war in middle east. For example, the Pakistani women and children who were killed in yesterday's raid were referred to as helping militants who were being pursued by US forces. I doubt they were providing cover fire with Kalashnikovs. More like trying to get physically in between the soldiers and the militants in order to facilitate escape. Does that make them terrorists? merely aiders and abettors? given the nature of terrorism, do you classify and aiding and abetting of terrorists as terrorism? I think it comes down to whether the aider/abettor does so in the furtherance of the terrorist agenda (e.g., both wants to shut down the republican convention_ or whether they do so for other reason (e.g., terrorist wants to shut down convention; peaceful protester merely wants to bring media attention to conditions in unknown part of the world.... and e.g., terrorist and aiders/abettors purpose is to get American soldiers out of country, vs. terrorist acts to get Americans out, aider/abettor acts because terrorist is her son).

[danodukebb]

this is fuggin bullshit...
I hate this government

[Jenos Ridan]

Let's not forget this part:

RNC Welcoming Committee is a self-described anarchist group that has worked for months planning disruptions at the convention. Police blamed the group for sparking violence during Monday's antiwar protest in St. Paul. Although most of the estimated 10,000 people at the march were peaceful, police say a splinter group of about 200 people harassed delegates, smashed windows and started at least one fire.

.

So some folks are really emotional about Bush, the war, etc. Do you not think it possible that they planned to "scare the bad guys" with terrorist tactics. Because let me remind you that terrorism isn't about just killing people. It's about killing, beating, intimidating by other means as well. Non-violent protest is part of the right to free speech. Destroying property and assaulting people out of individual anger, emotion, or personal animosity is a simple crime. Doing those things for the political purpose of depriving other people of their freedom is terrorism. And yes, conspiracy and attempt is a crime, but I doubt it was just "thoughts". When you go out to protest non-violently at an event where a few misguided militants in your group talked seriously about bringing malitovs, for example, and then they show up and start a violent conflict, that's probably conspiracy by even the non-violent guys because the crowd enabled the militant to do the terrorism with the prospect of anonymity and getting away.

This is an emerging area of legal thinking. Part of it happens on the front lines of the war in middle east. For example, the Pakistani women and children who were killed in yesterday's raid were referred to as helping militants who were being pursued by US forces. I doubt they were providing cover fire with Kalashnikovs. More like trying to get physically in between the soldiers and the militants in order to facilitate escape. Does that make them terrorists? merely aiders and abettors? given the nature of terrorism, do you classify and aiding and abetting of terrorists as terrorism? I think it comes down to whether the aider/abettor does so in the furtherance of the terrorist agenda (e.g., both wants to shut down the republican convention_ or whether they do so for other reason (e.g., terrorist wants to shut down convention; peaceful protester merely wants to bring media attention to conditions in unknown part of the world.... and e.g., terrorist and aiders/abettors purpose is to get American soldiers out of country, vs. terrorist acts to get Americans out, aider/abettor acts because terrorist is her son).

What happens to those who are accessory to murder or rape? Terrorism is little more than serial rape and/or murdur writ large with a political motive.

So, what happens?

[jonesthecurl]

These people did nothing violent.
They have no history of doing anything violent.
Search warrants tuend up nothing to indicate that they were thinking of doing or encouraging anything violent.
So far as I can see, they just wanted to make a political point.
Pardon me for not being American, but I thought that was allowed here, not a crime subject to a possible 7 1/2 years in prison. I thought you guys were proud of being allowed to speak your minds, thought it was garuanateed under a rather early Amendment...

[Jenos Ridan]

These people did nothing violent.
They have no history of doing anything violent.
Search warrants tuend up nothing to indicate that they were thinking of doing or encouraging anything violent.
So far as I can see, they just wanted to make a political point.
Pardon me for not being American, but I thought that was allowed here, not a crime subject to a possible 7 1/2 years in prison. I thought you guys were proud of being allowed to speak your minds, thought it was garuanateed under a rather early Amendment...

Look up the Alien and Sedition Act, since it remains (as far as I know) on the books since roughly 1780-something/1790-something, we really don't need the Patriot Act, just evidence and a court date.

[danodukebb]

It used to be before ****wad bush and his friends fugged up our rights

[gdeangel]

These people did nothing violent.
They have no history of doing anything violent.
Search warrants tuend up nothing to indicate that they were thinking of doing or encouraging anything violent.
So far as I can see, they just wanted to make a political point.
Pardon me for not being American, but I thought that was allowed here, not a crime subject to a possible 7 1/2 years in prison. I thought you guys were proud of being allowed to speak your minds, thought it was garuanateed under a rather early Amendment...

Um, you know these things because you were there?

See my post above. If you are the driver of Kennedy's motorcade, and I tell you I am going to be in the book depository window with a high power rifle on the afternoon of the motorcade, and you show up to drive that day down the street, knowing that I was pretty serious, and with the expectation and hope to see the President shot, even if you do not intend to do anything violent yourself, then you would be just as guilty of the assassination as the trigger puller. End of story.

And the alien and sedition acts are probably unconstitutional - they are a red herring here.

[jay_a2j]

Terrorism charges lodged against protesters at GOP convention
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washing ... sters.html

Bush To Criminalize Protesters Under Patriot Act As Disruptors
http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article/1401 ... disruptors

Minnesota Chapter of National Lawyers Guild
http://www.dhafirtrial.net/2008/09/03/r ... s-acts-of/

Ok, this makes me swear out loud. Now protesting is punishable as an act of terrorism? What the crap is this crap?

We are moving closer to a fascist government. All with the help of a deceitful "attack" on 9/11.........



Welcome New World Order!

[Jenos Ridan]

I just checked, I'm not sure if it is still on the books, looked like it expired a long time ago.

[gdeangel]

Terrorism charges lodged against protesters at GOP convention
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washing ... sters.html

Bush To Criminalize Protesters Under Patriot Act As Disruptors
http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article/1401 ... disruptors

Minnesota Chapter of National Lawyers Guild
http://www.dhafirtrial.net/2008/09/03/r ... s-acts-of/

Ok, this makes me swear out loud. Now protesting is punishable as an act of terrorism? What the crap is this crap?

We are moving closer to a fascist government. All with the help of a deceitful "attack" on 9/11.........

Welcome New World Order!

The fascists here are the liberals who think its o.k. to beat Republican conventioneers in the streets. Go look up the definition of fascism ...

[Juan_Bottom]

These people did nothing violent.
They have no history of doing anything violent.
Search warrants tuend up nothing to indicate that they were thinking of doing or encouraging anything violent.
So far as I can see, they just wanted to make a political point.
Pardon me for not being American, but I thought that was allowed here, not a crime subject to a possible 7 1/2 years in prison. I thought you guys were proud of being allowed to speak your minds, thought it was garuanateed under a rather early Amendment...

Um, you know these things because you were there?

See my post above. If you are the driver of Kennedy's motorcade, and I tell you I am going to be in the book depository window with a high power rifle on the afternoon of the motorcade, and you show up to drive that day down the street, knowing that I was pretty serious, and with the expectation and hope to see the President shot, even if you do not intend to do anything violent yourself, then you would be just as guilty of the assassination as the trigger puller. End of story.

And the alien and sedition acts are probably unconstitutional - they are a red herring here.

I haven't found any evidence against them, and I looked this morning, cauze this pissed me off. But all I could find out is that some paid informant(s) turned them in. And honestly, I would suspect that if the cops found a cache of bats and molotov cocktails that they would have told everyone. It would only bolster their version of the story.

All I found that they found...... where fliers...........

[gdeangel]

I haven't found any evidence against them, and I looked this morning, cauze this pissed me off. But all I could find out is that some paid informant(s) turned them in. And honestly, I would suspect that if the cops found a cache of bats and molotov cocktails that they would have told everyone. It would only bolster their version of the story.

All I found that they found...... where fliers...........

For one think, police rely on informants all the time, as do prosecutors. This is one of the reasons the justice system in general is plagued by problems - an informant who is "invested" with the authority of the state prosecutors office looks a lot better to a jury than the guy sitting in the defendant's chair. However, more often than not, he is in fact doing the same stuff as the guy in the defendant's chair. That's now going a bit off into drug prosecutions.

If an informant shows up saying that he was in this group, thought they were all about going out and picketing the convention but at the meeting people were talking about how to make molitov cocktails, what should the police do? Sit on their hands and see if anyone starts throwing molitov's? Maybe put the fire department and local hospital on high altert? And after the protests actually do turn violent?

Just because blog-of-the-month doesn't have the evidence, or maybe the evidence is sealed by court order and even a legitimate news reported would have to really care enough about it and have major backing by their paper to go and file suit to get the information released, that doesn't mean there is no evident.

Really, don't worry to much about these bunch of rich kids and "ivy tower free thinkers"... they have a right to an attorney, and if they are not deemed a danger or flight risk, they'll get out on bail. Then they can have their day in court to force the prosecution to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, and, uh, if there really is NO evidence against them that would be impossible, wouldn't it. Even the Patriot Act doesn't change that. Like I said, I've known prosecutors to bring some cases for the wrong reasons, but I've never known a prosecutor to bring a case with NO evidence.

[jonesthecurl]

Hope you're right. Let's wait and see.

[black elk speaks]

how come juan never bothers to get opposing views to the left slant garbage that he reads?

http://www.twincities.com/news/ci_10344356?source=rss

I have to admit, there isn't a lot that these people were going to achieve with the materials that they had, but lets be realistic for a moment. WTF! are you telling me that its okay to barge into someone's rally and disrupt it? What about McCain's freedom of speech? Are not the rabble that got busted guilty of attempting to silence the Republican message?

you have the freedom of speech, not the freedom to sabotage. I saw these tools making outbursts during McCain's speech last night. i think its utterly juvenile that grown adults would stoop to such tacky methods to counter the republican message. These fools were not out for peaceful protests.

[b.k. barunt]

how come juan never bothers to get opposing views to the left slant garbage that he reads?

http://www.twincities.com/news/ci_10344356?source=rss

I have to admit, there isn't a lot that these people were going to achieve with the materials that they had, but lets be realistic for a moment. WTF! are you telling me that its okay to barge into someone's rally and disrupt it? What about McCain's freedom of speech? Are not the rabble that got busted guilty of attempting to silence the Republican message?

you have the freedom of speech, not the freedom to sabotage. I saw these tools making outbursts during McCain's speech last night. i think its utterly juvenile that grown adults would stoop to such tacky methods to counter the republican message. These fools were not out for peaceful protests.

You seem to have missed the point of this thread entirely. We have always had laws on the books to deal with such "juvenile behaviors", but now, under the "Patriot Act", such actions are dealt with in an extreme and unconstitutional manner. I myself was held for 2 days without a phone call under said act, simply to harass and attempt to intimidate me. By the way, Nixon employed his "dirty tricks" boys to disrupt the Democrats' rallies, and was never prosecuted for it.

The point that you ignored is that the flag waving, jump on the bandwagon Bush lovers have ushered in a Facist regime here in Amerika, and it'll probably get worse before it abates. Enjoy.


Honibaz

[MeDeFe]

Terrorism charges lodged against protesters at GOP convention
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washing ... sters.html

Bush To Criminalize Protesters Under Patriot Act As Disruptors
http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article/1401 ... disruptors

Minnesota Chapter of National Lawyers Guild
http://www.dhafirtrial.net/2008/09/03/r ... s-acts-of/

Ok, this makes me swear out loud. Now protesting is punishable as an act of terrorism? What the crap is this crap?

We are moving closer to a fascist government. All with the help of a deceitful "attack" on 9/11.........

Welcome New World Order!

The fascists here are the liberals who think its o.k. to beat Republican conventioneers in the streets. Go look up the definition of fascism ...

Except that there's no proof of anyone having planned to do that. And if you're talking about the violent protesters... so you get 200 assholes among 10000 peaceful demonstrators, pardon me, but isn't it possible that those 2% went there in order to cause trouble and have a fight with the police and were not very interested in the political message in the first place? You get something similar at a lot of football games (ask any Brit), so why not at demonstrations?

Also please refrain from using the words "liberal" and "conservative" to divide the political spectrum into a mere two positions, it only makes you look like you don't know what you're talking about. Drawing some conclusions from an article I read a while back about the terms, Bush can be labeled a liberal because he clearly wants the executive branch to make liberal use of its powers against those that are perceived to be its enemies, both within and without the state.

[Nikolai]

Y'know, I have to laugh that y'all get hyped up about violation of "rights" without looking for the whole story?

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/01/ ... index.html

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/02/ ... index.html

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/04/ ... index.html

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/05/ ... cnnSTCText

There's CNN, which, as we all know, isn't at all biased and has never, ever been shown to be partisan in their delivery... not that FOX is much better, but I don't feel like going to see what they have to say. So you'll need to read the whole story, since all news media try to put the outrage-inducing material at the front, then explain why it's no big deal at the end. (I'm not sure why I feel compelled to say this, since it's something everyone should know about news media, but....)

The upshot on this one is, 95+% of the protesters arrested weren't even charged with felonies, and the few who were charged under the Patriot Act were legitimate concerns. (Note: I'm not saying they are or are not terrorists. I am saying that the police had good reason to be concerned.)

Oh, and b.k. barunt... why do you think that spelling it "Amerika" with a k makes it more fascist? Are you a hater of k? Inquiring minds and so on...

[jonesthecurl]

how come juan never bothers to get opposing views to the left slant garbage that he reads?

http://www.twincities.com/news/ci_10344356?source=rss

I have to admit, there isn't a lot that these people were going to achieve with the materials that they had, but lets be realistic for a moment. WTF! are you telling me that its okay to barge into someone's rally and disrupt it? What about McCain's freedom of speech? Are not the rabble that got busted guilty of attempting to silence the Republican message?

you have the freedom of speech, not the freedom to sabotage. I saw these tools making outbursts during McCain's speech last night. i think its utterly juvenile that grown adults would stoop to such tacky methods to counter the republican message. These fools were not out for peaceful protests.

This from the guy (amongst many) who believes that the reason you need guns in your house is in case you decide upon armed insurrection against your government.

So: gun="ok, very American."
bucket of pee and some chicken-wire="lock 'em up, they're obviously planning something."

[OnlyAmbrose]

Maybe you failed to finish the article before you posted this?

"Although most of the estimated 10,000 people at the march were peaceful, police say a splinter group of about 200 people harassed delegates, smashed windows and started at least one fire."

And how can you fail to recognize the bias in a website called "vive la canada" with a pretty clear agenda?

[Juan_Bottom]

Maybe you failed to finish the article before you posted this?

"Although most of the estimated 10,000 people at the march were peaceful, police say a splinter group of about 200 people harassed delegates, smashed windows and started at least one fire."

And how can you fail to recognize the bias in a website called "vive la canada" with a pretty clear agenda?

I read four or five versions of this cheif, cauze it's crazy stuff. These people arrested have maintained that they planned peaceful protesting. And the police haven't actually tied them to anything.