Photos of the "Boston Cage"

[G_j]

http://www.cpr4democracy.com/TheBostonCage1.cfm

[Mandate My Ass]

1. That's horrendous

The whole free speech zone thing is a crock but that looks like something out of WWII.

[seabeyond]

2. ya, kerry if you are listening

when they say, what issue do you have with patriot act...........show a picture of this. say you dont want to put a lot of fellow americans, in this, that it is just too uncommfortable, that it is prison like, and i wont create america into this. that it appears, hilter like, nazi type images and just doesnt float your boat

that this is why you say the patriot act has gone too far. and if anyone cannot understand this concept, simply look at the picture

a huge eeeeewwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

kerry, call it the way it is, go back to the revolutionary days, the words of those fighting said repression

this is your passion, this is why you are here in this time, with experience sittin before congress all those many years ago in your glorious 20's............

do not validate this behavior, do not ignore, shy away from or embrace. it is not someone i will be, behind those wires, and teaching boys to nev-AH allow

[G_j]

3. nicely said!

:-)

[seabeyond]

11. have you ever been surfin, ride a wave

this is a wave, and it is a good wave, i am feeling so perfectly sittin there looking over my shoulder waiting to catch this wave. waiting for the momentum to build, this one feels good. this one feels like the one that will smoothly bring us to shore standing, and just simply step onto beach (win election)

why..............

this is the base of the fungus that is taking over our nation. this is why i exist. lol. all my life i have been one that easily feels another taking power, inappropriately. i have always balked at another directing me who to be. and we as a nation are so clearly allowing fear, greed (which comes from fear) to create us into such robots.

i feel kerry waffles thru the what many think is easy in controlling population, out of their own greed or inability to trust fellow man to make their own decisions on their lives. i listen to so many tell me how i am suppose to live, and say i no thank you, then the person gets angry at me cause i say no thank you. do but i dont have to

i see if kerry addresses this, there will be a bit of a lessing of momentum of our sheep like behavior. what f911 has done. this will jsut further the cause

[G_j]

14. a "window of opportunity"

or as Starhawk says, "A teachable moment"

Quick, John Kerry, the stage is set! get on your white horse and ride to the rescue!

[seabeyond]

15. lol lol ah, that feels so good

for someone to actually connect to what i say. so often they sit in huh

thanks that was fun

[G_j]

20. I've read a few other similar comments

about the possible opportunity here.
The wave analogy is right-on though.
Seriously, I wish somebody could get Kerry to read your two posts.

[seabeyond]

34. from you mouth to kerry's ear

how simple it would be. to be in truth is always, always, the simplist.....and is done in ease

one of my favorite.........

kiss; keep it simple stupid (i prefer silly, sweetheart, spirit, )

[G_j]

45. perhaps a little

music with that poetry?

:nopity:

[Hotler]

4. This is so messed up. Prelude to gulags.

Larry Flint said on c-span booknotes, "I don't understand why people weren't protesting in the streets after the 2000 elections voting fraud. If people would have protested, the supreme courts would not have gone the way it did." I myself don't understand why this isn't a bigger issue for us and the our elected Dems on the hill. If there was a reason to take to the streets in mass, this would be it. Or are we all talk and no action???

[KoolAidJones]

6. All talk

I have seen zero action of late.

[Bucky]

9. That's what a democracy should be -- all talk

Protesting is a form of "talking" and when you cut off protesting, you cut off democracy. I want there to be all talk. That's how we govern our country. When the "action" begins, democracy dies a little

[Sterling]

32. Cheers Bucky to you and your patriotism.

You seem to believe America and it's rights belong to everyone, not just people you agree with. Hats off to you Sir.

[Gothic Sponge]

5. You think it looks bad here

Wait until you see it for the RNC. From what i've heard, the cage is going to be off the West Side HWY.

[WilliamPitt]

7. I'm on my way down to get a first-hand view

Will report upon return.

[Sterling]

33. Be careful they might throw you in there.

I considered coming up from NYC to film but without a press pass I fear I would be looked up with the other concentration camp victims.

[Pepperbelly]

8. I looked at the photos & tried to become incensed but could not.

In one of the photos on the 2nd page, I saw where the Fleet Center is located in relation to this fenced area and it appears to me as though the area is as close as it could be and not interfere with either secuuity or access. I do not feel as bad seeing it as I did hearing it.

[kiahzero]

37. Yeah.... when you look at a map

You can see there's no good place to put the protestors.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

10. disgusting it makes Cuba look appealing...are there any port-a-johns???

[TexasSissy]

12. Saw this on The Daily Show. I'm fine with this. Protestors are okay, and

a space has been provided for them. But they can't be allowed to interfere with the convention.

The space seems plenty adequate. What would you expect? An auditorium with velvet curtains? It's an area constructed in a short period of time nearby but outside.....so....what do you want?

[Mr.Green93]

13. "so....what do you want?"

respect for the 1st Amendment would be nice

[Pepperbelly]

16. that is a slogan, not an answer.

How close do you think demonstrations should be before they begin infringing on the Democrat's right to exercise their free speech as well?

In the pics, the Fleet Center looks pretty close to me.

[Mr.Green93]

19. the 1st Amendment is a slogan?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble(in a cage?), and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

[Pepperbelly]

22. so tell me ...

what law has congress passed to limit those rights in Boston?

And don't the Democrats has an equal right to assemble?

That's what I mean by solgans.

[Mr.Green93]

25. I concede

Freedom cages are the way to go. I will go quietly drink some Victory gin.

[Pepperbelly]

26. whatever...

You should relax from time to time and don't keep fucking with me or I'll go into a marijuana rage! :D

[Mr.Green93]

27. sorry, this cage thing has me stranged

[Pepperbelly]

31. seriously though ...

I am very paranoid and one thing I fear is the use of provacateurs by the gop to instigate violence at the conventions. Do you remember the rent-a-mob they used in the PB recount?

If they can keep the possibility a controllable distance away from the convention, I think it would be a good thing. People can say whatever they want and they can assemble lawfully. I hope the tv cameras are pointed right the hell at them. I just don't want to see people get hurt and victimized by right-wing blackshirts in mufti.

[Sterling]

35. I think the convention should be in the cage.

No real American can look at that cage and believe his fellow citizens deserve to be herded in there just so they can express their constitutional rights. What the Dems are doing will only make it easier for the Pukes to do worse.

I also feel that if their were RW thugs trying to disrupt the convention that would help paint the RW as the extremeist. In this case it's the party that looks evil.

BTW the vast majority of people there will not be RWers at all. But most will be American's and all will be human beings that deserve better than waht our party has done to them.

[Pepperbelly]

38. so what is it that you propose that would guarantee everyone ...

their rights?

More importantly, the Democratic Convention IS being held isnside the cage.

[Bo]

69. Very well said....put those that

support these monstrosities in a cages as well.

[Ani Yun Wiya]

100. There is however...

Quite a difference between the right to peaceful assembly and "lawful"
assembly.

Who is it that decides what "law" is?

[troublemaker]

98. This is a particularly cheap reply

[HFishbine]

75. Are the democrats restricted

only to the Fleet Center? Didn't think so.

[Pepperbelly]

91. that response encroached into the realm of reciprocal reality.

The Democrats assembly is at Fleet Center. I suspect that they are not sleeping in the hall. I also suspect that anyone with credentials can go inside. I further suspect that those without cannot and that a perimeter is set up as any decent police department with a high visibility, national event would do.

I think you guys are hyperventilating and getting yourselves excited, as usual, over very little.

[HFishbine]

95. Exactly

And they can walk back to their hotels, go out to dinner, or stroll the boulevards wearing their Kerry shirts and pins -- unrestricted.

[TexasSissy]

115. You got it. Free speech is allowed in this country. Just not allowed

to disrupt a convention. MY rights need protecting, too. Freedom from dissidents and disruption at a political meeting that is supposed to be a joyous event. Free speech is allowed at the convention, but not protests, since that is disruptive to others and infringes on others' right. But the protests are allowed nearby. There is no quelling of free speech here.

Free speech is allowed in America....up to a point. The famous example is that it is illegal to yell "fire" in a theatre.

So speak all you want, yell, complain, criticize, write letters, get on TV for interviews....anything at all....except infringe on others' rights to have a non-disrupted meeting.

[name not needed]

17. A protest site that doesn't look like San Quentin would be nice

[TexasSissy]

116. Oh, please. It's just a fenced in area. Playgrounds across America are

exactly the same. If you think landscaping is so important, the protesters should maybe get their pocketbooks out and start paying a landscaping company. I would guess that the landscaping would quickly become not so important at that point.

It's just a fenced in area. What were you hoping for?

[G_j]

117. playgrounds are surrounded with razor wire?

I guess its been a while, how things have changed!

[psychopomp]

18. Daily Show link

http://www.comedycentral.com/mp/play.php?reposid=/multimedia/tds/helms/helms_9007.html

Opens in Real Player (sorry). A little funny, including a short interview with members of the Black Tea Society.

Oh, TS, I guess you missed the irony of the Daily Show piece. The point is that a "free speech zone" is ludicrous.

[Suspicious]

101. LOL

That is hilarious! }(

[tomorrowsashes]

41. that's bullshit

If this cage were at the RNC, and I'm pretty sure there will be one, I'm sure you'd be up in arms about it as well. I hate people who will throw away any of their values in support of the almighty political party. This is wrong. Protesters are supposed to be visible, and a little bit aggrivating to the people they're protesting.

I'm also pretty sure some people are gonna get hurt. There are two very small entrances/exits, so if anything goes wrong, people won't have an easy way out. I don't think anybody should go anywhere near that cage.

[G_j]

77. I thought they were watching out for people's safety

with this ...NOT

It would probably be silly to ask if the cage is handicapped accessible.. :shrug:

[HFishbine]

74. You're missing the point

It's not the quality of the area, but that there is an "area" at all.

[LibDemAlways]

21. A cage topped with razor wire

at the Democratic National Convention - is the first time most Americans will be exposed to a "free speech zone." The whores aren't going to explain about the chimp's history of suppression of free speech. This albatross is going to be hung around the neck of the Dems. FAUX will probably use it as a backdrop for much of their coverage. They'll interview every person with a grievance against the Dems - on the left and right - who find themselves in there. Imagine pro-lifers with small children behind razor wire?

This is a trap set by the WH, and Kerry is falling right into it.

At the repuke convention, the whores will forget about protestors
outside. They'll be much too busy kissing the rich white asses inside.

[Sterling]

30. But now it's a two party issue.

Not that it was not before but now the RNC in NY which will likely be worse will be excused and overlooked because the Dems did it too.

Thanks again for great leadership guys. I knew I could count on you to make every mistake imaginable.

[LibDemAlways]

42. This is a Rove-Ridge production -

draconian overkill erected to serve as a focal point for the whores'
Dem bashing. And the organizers are apparently too stupid to see it for what it is, just going along silently while America gets the impression that Dems hate freedom.

[Sterling]

61. Yes a poor move on the parties part.

Every mistake imaginable.

[tedzbear]

67. The 1968 demonstrators would be furious about this.

They would definitely have rioted and broken through, as well they should. Seeing this cage is confirmation that the DNC has embraced the fascist oligarchy and no longer represents the people of the United States.

:puke:

[Tellurian]

23. I dunno...I remember the (paid) republican disruptors at the PB recount

they physically assaulted the people carrying placards outside election hdqs demanding their votes be counted..we all know how that went.

This security action cuts both ways.. I don't doubt the Repukes will be violent in their protests of Kerry's nomination. I, for one, feel Kerry's precautionary steps are warranted after past experience dealing with uncivilized republican disruptors.

[Straight Shooter]

24. I don't like it, but it wouldn't be there if bush hadn't set the stage

This is the result of "follow the misleader." People will have all kinds of reasons for creating chaos at the Dem Convention and you just about can't be too careful, like it or not. I do not want a homegrown terrorist incident disrupting Kerry and Edwards being in the spotlight and getting their message across.

The cage may be ugly, but the tone in America has become ugly, too. As above, so below. It's just a manifestation of America's collective consciousness.

[Spygame]

28. Unbelievable

[Sterling]

29. Oh I am so proud of my party and country..

When I see that cage. Freedom and all that other stuff had just become so tedious.

I honestly have decided to buy my first gun. And I have a feeling it will be the first of several. The bigger the better.

[kiahzero]

39. Right

So, because the Democratic Party is persuing a sensible security strategy, while still having the protestors in visual range of the Fleet Center, they are attacking freedom?

It's a time, place, and manner restriction to protect the delegates and guests to the convention. It was either a setup like this, or the protestors would probably end up out of sight of the Fleet Center altogether. The Court's ruling in Hill v. Colorado calls for the least restrictive regulations possible, and the Democratic Party did what it could to bring the protests in as close as possible to the Fleet Center without endangering the security of those going to the convention.

[Sterling]

50. It is not sensible at all.

It is totalitarian and worthy of our disgust.

[King of New Orleans]

36. Uh, the cage is for the people in the convention

The photos shows the separation point between those inside the "secure" area, the convention, and those outside. The protest areas is largely an open lot with all the wire, girders etc...at the end adjacent to convention.

It's all pretty obvious when you look at the Daily Show Clip.

[Sterling]

51. The lot is closed in by fence and concrete with razor wire.

So what are you trying to say exactly?

[King of New Orleans]

55. I'm saying

the convention area is closed in with fences and razor wire

The protestors are in the area adjacent to that in a big empty area until you get near the Fleet Center when the area is underneath a bunch of rails and adjacent to the concrete blockades/fences and razor wire that keeps the protestors out of the secure zone.

[Sterling]

57. That is not what the picture shows at all.

It shows a confined space meant for protesters. Are you looking at the same space?

[King of New Orleans]

65. I think those pictures show one end of the area

that's adjacent to convention center

I'm referring to what I saw on the Daily Show (you can see the area the picture were taken at in the background)

http://www.comedycentral.com/mp/play.php?reposid=/multi...

Update I can't make the link work from here but it does from post #18

[G_j]

70. reduced capacity to 1000 Surrounded on three sides with razor wire on top.

http://news.bostonherald.com/dncConvention/view.bg?articleid=37086

Don't fence us in: Activists shun `protest pen'
By Dave Wedge

Sunday, July 25, 2004

<snip>
The fenced-in area, which is adjacent to the FleetCenter and shrouded in netting and barbed wire, initially was built to hold 4,000 people, but the judge reduced the capacity to 1,000. Protesters have vowed not to use it and are posting messages online to stay out of the ``protest pens''

<snip>
Activists have posted a scathing report by a Gloucester security expert who claims the protest pen is a deathtrap - and security overall at the DNC is ``absolutely appalling'' in its weaknesses.

Security consultant Jim Atkinson says he's documented lapses ranging from unlocked gates around the FleetCenter to unprotected ventilation systems in the media pavilion.

Perhaps most troubling is his claim that more than 400 manhole covers in the area are unsecured and appear not to have been swept for explosives.

..more..
-----
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/07/25/dems.main /


Convention protesters demand more visible space
Boston plans more officers, cameras, closures next week

Sunday, July 25, 2004 Posted: 1:33 PM EDT (1733 GMT)


BOSTON, Massachusetts (CNN) -- Protesters at the Democratic National Convention say their designated area outside the FleetCenter infringes on their safety and free speech rights.

At a news conference Saturday, protesters also complained that the fenced-in area is out of sight to most delegates and passers-by en route to the arena. The convention begins Monday. (Special Report: America Votes 2004, the Democratic convention)

"We are very alarmed that our First Amendment rights have been undermined to the degree that the city of Boston now thinks the rights of free expression, the right to rally and protest means you get out into an area like this," said Leslie Cagan, co-founder of United for Peace and Justice, who likened the protest area to an internment camp.

The area, with a small stage, is surrounded on three sides by a wire fence with razor wire on top. A dozen U.S. Army troops joined Boston police inspecting the space Saturday.

..more..

[King of New Orleans]

72. Yeah if I were a protestor I'd stay out of the "pen"

I'd stay in the big empty lot that is part of the protest site

[G_j]

73. my guess is that there will be no one inside the cage n/t

[bread_and_roses]

40. I can't believe people are justifying this

The WHOLE COUNTRY is supposed to be a FREE SPEECH ZONE!!! And protest is meant to be seen and heard by the persons who are the subject of the protest. Seeing is believing. Remember Bush, so "surprised" by seeing protestors abroad? It is easy to minimize and discount what you don't see and hear. As for the Dems right of free speech, don't people need a badge of some sort to get into the convention? No one is asking that they allow people off the street into the convention.

Just another brick in the wall.

[Pepperbelly]

43. so I will ask you a question ...

how would you guarantee the rights of free speech and freedom to assemble for everyone involved? The conention goers, the press, the demonstrators?

[Sterling]

53. No one has threatened their rights.

If something like that occurs then by all means deal with it. What did we ever do before free speech zones, how did our democracy work?

[Pepperbelly]

63. Do you really prefer ...

that with large demonstrations it is better for them to end in arrests and violence if some of the participants get out of hand? You know it can happen. I know it can happen and between you, me and everyone who bothers to read this, I am paranoid enough to think that gop provocatuers will be present and would love to cause some real shit.

Black-shirts in mufti walking among the citizens. That would not be good for any of us except the black-shirts.

edited for a typo.

[HFishbine]

82. "if" being the operatitve word.

The pre-emption of "ifs" are steadily and surely erroding our liberties.

[Pepperbelly]

92. conflating everything together is ...

destroying our discourse as well so there you go.

What is unreasonable about setting a perimeter around a high visibility national event?

[HFishbine]

97. Nothing

is unreasonable about setting up a perimeter around the convention. Then again, nobody is arguing against that. You're diverting again. But I think your concern about the nature of discourse (as you see it) is a real clue to your mindset.

[HFishbine]

81. Another excellent point!

For over two hundred years we managed to abide by one of the most fundemental tenents of the CONSTITUTION -- through wars and "race riots" -- what justifies this now?

[HFishbine]

80. That's too easy

You let people go where they will in public spaces. Nobody's rights are infringed until their movements are restricted, they are threatened, or are accosted -- there are already laws against those actions, so if they happen, then arrests can be made. "Pre-emptive" measures assume that laws will be broken if people are not confined.

Good God, I sometimes think four more years of Bush would be just fine -- so that some people will get it through their thick skulls.

[Pepperbelly]

87. I don't believe that unfettered access to the ...

Democratic National Convention is wise, either for safety or for the Democrats' right to assemble. I suppose that if people lined the sidewalks like protesters at abortion clinics and spat upon those they didn't like that freedom would be served?

Nope.

It would just cause violence.

[HFishbine]

96. Logic error

Nobody is arguing for "unfettered access to the democratic convention." That's a diversion and a falacy of logic. Nice diversion though.

[Ani Yun Wiya]

102. 200 years...

Of conventions without these "free speech zones" (which conversely implies that some "zones" have "no free speech").

I would suggest that we NOT use those methods proscribed by those who appear to have no understanding of the basic precepts of DEMOCRACY.

[kohodog]

104. "Free Speech Zones" = Orwellian newspeak

Pretty soon we'll be happy to mbe able to speak freely in our homes without the teletron.

I love Big Brother.

Please people, don't go into the cage.

[kiahzero]

44. Read Hill v. Colorado, then get back to me

I guess we need to let abortion clinic protestors harrass young women again, since the whole country is a "free speech zone."

[bread_and_roses]

46. Protesting and harassing are not synonymous (n/t)

[kiahzero]

47. Did you read the decision?

Given that it is the precedent in question, it might be nice if you informed yourself about the issue before discussing it.

[Mandate My Ass]

48. Agreed

Clinic patients and elected public figures are also not synonymous.

[kiahzero]

52. So, decisions only apply to the circumstances of the case in question?

Wow... I guess the whole notion of "precedent" is wrong, then. I never knew! :shrug:

[Sterling]

54. Maybe it's your viewpoint that is flawed?

You seem to feel that this "precedent" trumps the constitution and common decency at that. I question if this truly sets a precedent at all that applies to this and even if it were it is still worng and not to be tolerated in a free society.

Everything the Nazi's did was legal under their system.

[kiahzero]

60. OK, now you've just gone into the realm of silliness

You seem to feel that this "precedent" trumps the constitution and common decency at that. I question if this truly sets a precedent at all that applies to this and even if it were it is still worng and not to be tolerated in a free society.

Hardly.

The point of the ruling is that it is not feasible for protestors to do so whenever, whereever, and however they want. Therefore, the Supreme Court did what it does best: balanced conflicting rights. You "question if this truly sets a precedent at all" because you don't know what the hell you're talking about.

Nice Nazi comparison, by the way. Because when you don't agree with someone, they must be a wannabe Nazi. :eyes:

[HFishbine]

86. You are fond of the false dichotomy

You assume that non-confinement will automatically result in harrasment. That's a false choice. People can be unrestrained and still not harrass people. If they do, then they can be arrested, but it's weak logic to suggest that there are only two possibilities.

[Pepperbelly]

89. which opens the doors to ...

violence and spectacle.

And if you saw the paid provocateurs at the PB re-counts, how can you doubt that probablity.

And the anti-choicers.

Do they have the right to crowd the entrance and spit on people they do not like? Why do you want that situation to be enabled a convention?

[HFishbine]

99. Bingo!

Now you've got it! Free people leave the doors open to illegal behavior. Slaves and subjects have their freedoms denied in advance because of POSSIBLE crimes.

It's simple-minded to suggest that the alternative to having people in pens is having people spit upon. It's not an either/or situation (and I believe you probably know that).

For God's sake, man, carry your logic through and there are a slew of crimes that could be reduced if we simply tracked and monitored and controlled the movements of all citizens. Is that what you want? If it's good enough to reduce the possibility of crime at a convention, what argument is there for not implimenting such restrictions on all people on a permament basis? What is it about controling possible crimes at this paritucal event that sets it apart from controling crime in general?

[kiahzero]

112. It's hardly a false dichtomy

Either the entire United States is a free speech zone, Hill v. Colorado was wrongfully decided, and anti-abortion groups should be able to harass women going into clinics

OR

The entire United States is not a free speech zone, and there exist some time, place, and manner restrictions that are constitutionally valid.

The two options are mutually exclusive and exhaustive.

[HFishbine]

78. Well put!

Couldn't have said it better!

[pezcore64]

49. SAD

how sad
i thought we'd be better than that.
i can understand the need to control any crowd that forms outside, but damn.

[Killarney]

56. Poor protesters

this sucks! Instead of being put in an area where they can still freely protest but cannot intefere with security at a top terrorist goal site, they should be able to do whatever they want! They should be able to block the doorways! Block the streets! Cause confusion and meddle with the cops and security trying to keep everyone safe! Who cares if the delegates can't get in? Who cares if this is a top terrorist site and they interfere with security and allow the FleetCenter, our nominees, and the city of Boston to be blown to fucking hell? Right?

I'm so sick of this story already and the whining. :eyes:

[Sterling]

59. Im sick of the ignorant point of view.

That the rights of our fellow citizens are inconvienent.

No one has said the protesters should be allowed to disrupt anything. You have created a false delima.

[Pepperbelly]

66. not so at all ...

The convention is occuring within the cage if you pull back and look at what's really happening. The "cage" is very close to the Center. If it was any closer, it would be blocking access and ruining any chance to keep the area secure.

[unfrigginreal]

62. That's right!

What they should really do is issue shoot to kill orders on any protesters. Fuck this freedom shit, who needs it?

[HFishbine]

83. Wrong!

There are laws on the books against blocking streets and doorways or inciting riots. Those inclined to do so are not going to shuffle into a pen anyway. Enforce the laws when they are violated, but don't use suspicion that they might be violated as an excuse to minimize the voices of dissent.

[kohodog]

88. RIGHT, IT'S CALLED FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY AND YES I'M SHOUTING

In case you haven't noticed we're becoming The Police States of America.

No there is no right to riot, but peaceful assembly is legal. To cage people in pens far away from the event doesn't seem very American to me.

So, This is what Democracy looks like? People in razor wire pens? Seems more like the Soviets under Stalin.

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

58. "The whole world is watching!"

--The people protesting at the Democratic Convention held in Chicago, 1968

--I don't recall THEM being caged (at least until after their arrests...) :evilgrin:

[Zidane]

64. Is this structure normally here?

or was it just built?

[shawmut]

76. Yes, it's an elevated train track

but it's going to be torn down after the convention because the line that runs along it is being moved underground. Trains stopped running along those tracks a few weeks ago.

[Bo]

68. WE look sooooo bad....

Dems should DO something now......

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

71. The Germans called their Free Speech Zone - Buchenwald

That's where they kept all those noisy, impolite, disruptive, Communists, Social Democrats, Trade Unionist, loudmouths who couldn't appreciate the need for National Security.

[DaveSZ]

79. It looks like Osama is winning

:grr:

:puke:

:(

[HFishbine]

84. No shit!

People think killing insurgents in Iraq is a battle in the war on terror, when in fact, we're losing bigtime on the home front.

[Tight_rope]

85. America has become a sad place to live!...n/t

[seabeyond]

90. treat people like animals and that is what they will become

are you allowing your fear of 9/11 to make you decisions. are you assuming the worse would happen living a fear of what could happen, or sticking to history and what has happened and how we can have protest with the basics to following law

living in the fear, is living bush's world

i dont live in that world

[kohodog]

93. Thank you Seabeyond...well said!

Not my world either. They're afraid that if they let us protest without these outrageous restrictions it actually would be peaceful and thry can't live with that.

If the "protesters" are behind razor wire all they need to do is take a few pictures of the "tratorous animals" who are so crazy and dangerous that they need to be kept in pens.

The huge worldwide antiwar protests were for the most part peacful, only a few minor incidents. Then again, maybe they weren't protests. Bush thought they were focus groups!

[CaTeacher]

94. this whole thing makes me sick!

Do we even have a democracy anymore?

[Warren DeMontague]

103. Again, this is NOT NEW, people.

I posted in another thread that I went to the 96 Free Speech Zone to see Delores Huerta speak. As a Clinton supporter I felt pretty uncomfortable surrounded by rabid, clinton-hating fetus brandishers.. but I could understand why they weren't allowed to camp out in front of the united center. For the record, this was in an enclosed, fenced area, easily a mile from where the convention was. "Free speech"? I don't know. However, it is the same legal structure that keeps anti-choice people from blocking clinic entrances that allows this to go down. Personally, I'm more outraged that we can't get any dissenting voices on the mainstream media, and that with tons of polls saying Kerry is leading, the one that gets all the press is the one from the AP with the dubious "Bush winning electoral college" header... While I do think there should be more accomodation made for free expression, right now I'm really not THAT upset that the fetus people have to be behind a fence. Sorry.

[kohodog]

105. Just because it's not new doesn't mean it's right.

Look at today when both sides got into a tangle. So what. The riot squad isn't far behind and do you really think this is a safety issue? Most of these repression zones have been constructed to protect the powers that be from embarassment. What's the rule for the anti choice people, 100 feet? That's different from Nebraska where they'd like us to be.

This is fundamentally anti-American and fear driven. I will not live my life afraid to speak, afraid to assemble, or afraid to speak for what's right.

You can't solicit votes within 150 (or is it 75) feet from a polling place. But to show up to speak your mind about policy you have to go into a cage. Come on there is no defense to that absurdity.

[Suspicious]

106. The fact that you claim

this is nothing new does not make it acceptable. By the way - was the "free speech" zone in '96 complete with razor wire?


As a Clinton supporter I felt pretty uncomfortable surrounded by rabid, clinton-hating fetus brandishers...

...right now I'm really not THAT upset that the fetus people have to be behind a fence

Your apparent wish to paint a picture in which the demonstrators are mainly "fetus people" is less than honest, as well.


While I do think there should be more accomodation made for free expression...

Free speech is not something to be "accommodated" - it is our right under the First Amendment.

[Warren DeMontague]

107. It's not a "claim", it's a fact.

And I didn't say it was acceptable. I just said I, personally, have bigger fish to fry than insuring that anti-abortion people have free access to scream and wave bloody placards at delegates on their way into OUR convention. It's not my "wish" to paint the demonstrators as mainly "fetus people", that was my experience, in Chicago, in 1996. The vast majority of people protesting the dem. convention were right wing anti-abortion people.

And the gist of these thread, mainly, has been that this is something "new" and hence horrific. It's not, again, and that's not a "claim", it's a fact. I don't remember if there was razor wire in 96, or not. There was a big ol' fence, I know that.

Free speech is not something to be "accommodated" - it is our right under the First Amendment.

Fine, tell it to Mr. Ashcroft. Hate to break it to you, but I'm not in charge of these things.

[bread_and_roses]

108. unless you assure the rights of anti-abortionists

and even loathsome self-proclaimed Nazis to free speech and peaceable assembly you undermine everyone's rights.

[Warren DeMontague]

109. They Have The right to free speech.

Where they assemble and express, however, is subject to debate and regulation. Again, I don't make the rules, I'm just pointing them out. I don't know how many other threads you've read my posts in, but I'm something of a first amendment absolutist. There are certainly people here I've come across who would love to censor certain images, or books, or movies, and the like, because of this that or the other reason. I've caught all kinds of hell for my libertarian viewpoint that the first amendment is pretty all-encompassing, and certainly includes so-called "offensive" speech.

However... Does that mean that, say, anti-abortion people have the right to assemble and protest wherever they want? How about a doctor's office where the doctor is trying to perform an abortion? I'm the first to admit that the right of free speech is only as good as the right of the most obscene, onerous, or offensive viewpoint to be heard. But does that mean Nazis have a right to enter a synogogue during yom kippur and start singing "Deutschland, Deutschland, Uber Alles"? There's a fine line between peaceable assembly and disruptive mob action. You can't have a protest wherever you want for whatever reason-- you do have to get permits and the like. Now, I fully admit that that in and of itself strikes me as inherently anti-democratic, but I do understand why the rules are that way- even if they are misapplied at times.

[Suspicious]

110. Chicago was a precursor, certainly,

what with the "protest pits", etc. - but they have taken it to extremes in Boston that were not part of the '96 convention. Regardless, it is wrong, and that's the point I'm trying to make. I don't care if it has been going on in some form or another for 100 years - it's wrong. Period. It should be called to everyone's attention and stopped. These tactics are growing increasingly worse - how much farther are we willing to let it slide?

When you say it was your experience in Chicago that the demonstrators were mainly anti-choice - that's honest. To then go on and say, "the vast majority of people protesting the dem. convention were right wing anti-abortion people..." is not honest. You have no way of proving such a thing. There were many groups demonstrating (left-leaning), marching (yes, they were allowed to march in '96) for/against many of the same things they will be demonstrating for/against in Boston. Please don't marginalize them.

On the same topic - I may be pro-choice, but the anti-choice crowd has every bit as much right as I do to demonstrate, and I will defend that right. If they break laws, we have a justice system, and they have a right to due process within that system, as well.

[Warren DeMontague]

113. I actually agree with you on pretty much all of this.

I'm not trying to marginalize anyone, either. I agree it's gone too far. In '92 I saw Clinton & Gore at a rally at the Daley Ctr. in Chicago. There were several people there with Bush Quayle signs, vastly outnumbered but no one challenged their right to be there. I find the fact that folks are being turned away from Bush rallies for wearing anti-bush t-shirts and the like especially upsetting. Frankly, I think that we have seen way too much stifling of dissent, and in the name of "security" it is only getting worse. My only point was, the FSZ is not a totally new development. Personally, I think if you're going to have one, it should be right across the street from the event. That, to me, would be a sensible way to handle both security and free speech concerns. There is a place for crowd control when dealing with such a large event. I do acknowledge that you can't have everyone running willy-nilly wherever they want. I don't think that makes me a fascist.

[kiahzero]

114. That's what the city was trying to do

Personally, I think if you're going to have one, it should be right across the street from the event. That, to me, would be a sensible way to handle both security and free speech concerns. There is a place for crowd control when dealing with such a large event. I do acknowledge that you can't have everyone running willy-nilly wherever they want.

The FSZ is right on top of the convention center. It was a tradeoff - somewhere more open, but further away, or somewhere less than ideal, but close to the center.

[Suzi Creamcheese]

111. A disgrace to America. Dam that Ashcraft and his Patriot Act!