Unfreedom of speech

[Wulfere]

Now this is the kind of post I like to read. You have differing opinions, but still manage to respect each other. Ok well maybe there are a couple digs in there.

Having not worked with the Secret Service, most folks have no idea the amount of work and stress they are under. Each time ANY President goes into the open they are in danger. From Crack-Pots or from Terrorists. The Secret Service does alot of work for every event the President attends. They are there weeks in advance and have plans and more plans and contingecy plans for those plans. They take the Job very seriously. Just ask the guys who threw themselves infront of Reagan if they would do it again.

You can't put everyone behind a barrier. But, you do have to watch the more extreme elements more closely. People individually are smart, thoughtful (for the most part) and generally fun to be around. But, in a crowd that changes, and it can get ugly very fast. Common sense can fly out the window in a hurry. All you need is a leader with an agenda and a little charisma. It's a plain fact. That's the way we are made.

It all boils down to what you want to believe. How you percieve the events and interpret them. Personally, I prefer to believe in the system. Because if you choose not to what do you have? Are there problems? Yes. There always will be, it will never be perfect. But, we try. Individually and as a people this Nation struggles for each gain and when we fall we have to grit our teeth and claw our way back. No system is perfect. Change is the only real constant. It's how we ride the tides of change and events that define us.

Am I babbling? WOW! It's three hours past my bedtime. Take care all. God Bless.

[ 09-06-2002, 11:35 PM: Message edited by: Wulfere ]

[Spelca]

Originally posted by John D Harris: Originally posted by Spelca: How did they know one of the anti people wasn't hiding in the pro crowd? If I were one of them that's what I'd do. [img]tongue.gif[/img] *poke* [img]tongue.gif[/img] Well I debated with myself about even mentioning it, but historicaly most, if not all of the attempts and sucesses on the lives of leaders came from an Anti hiding in the pro crowds. But if the Secret Service had their way the President would never be in public.

I think they removed the anti and left the pro ones right next to the road where he passed because they wanted to make him look good. Or maybe they wanted him to think he was really loved. Hehe. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Originally posted by Spelca: Sorry, but it seems that you often refuse certain sources because they don't support your idea. You can't claim they just make everything up, especially if more of them say similar things... And you also can't claim other sources (right and center) aren't biased either. [img]tongue.gif[/img] (I deleted the smileys in your post because there was no space for mine). [img]tongue.gif[/img] No problem about the smileys [img]smile.gif[/img] I didn't say anything of the sort. I just said those are biased leftleaning sources. I never said they "made up" anything. You see if they make stuff up they can be sued for liable or slander. No what they do is they spin the subject, leave out key words, phrases and or information. It is not limited to just the three sources you mentiond. I also am in a better position than most to comment on how stories get slashed up and rephrased by editors because I used to be in a position to actually see the AP and UP stories when they were being sent in from the field. Sooooo now I get to the point. I read the AP, UP and the leftist stories, I read the center and the right and then I even check out some info from canada and britain and then filter it all with my own life experiences and form my own opinions...knowing that none of the media is telling the whole truth. ----------------- Now about 'biased' newspapers... I think I've written this once before. [img]smile.gif[/img] Not all protests are violent (not talking about sport 'demonstrators' here...). Actually, most of them are peaceful. The police often makes them violent by pushing people, by surrounding them, arresting innocent people, beating them, etc. This doesn't happen all the time, of course, but there are cases where the violence was caused by the police. Im sorry you totally ignore the fact that police are out numbered many many to one, and you also do not account for the fact that a single violent protestor can set off an entire crowd. (there is a whole field of study on mob mentality, and crowd psycholgy, you might be interested in the classes)The police are doing the right thing to squelch the violence swift and early. Untill you go out and face a crowd of thousands and have seen what can happen to you when you are responsible for maintaining order I think you are not qualified to judge them. Crowd controll is not something that you can take lightly and the police have their lives on the line when they are out there. It doesnt take much for a crazed mob to overwhelm a smaller number of police. I agree "most" protests are peaceful and uneventful, but the police cannot afford to sit back and ignore one or two violent types, they can be the catalyst that incites a total riot. An example; a couple of protesters became violent, so the rest of the protesters sat down on the floor and sang peaceful songs to stop it, when the police came at them and beat them. - If I remember correctly, this happened in Germany. I read it on some site when I was looking for a different view of demonstrations reported on tv... [img]smile.gif[/img] Another example could be a small group of people in Slovenia giving out food to the homeless and singing in a park. They were known for being Anti-NATO and because some important people in Slovenia want to join the NATO they were all monitored with cameras and written down by the police even though they didn't do anything wrong. As a comparison, there was another protest a day earlier and there was almost no police in sight. [img]smile.gif[/img] Umm so they were "monitored" and written down (not sure what that means) were they hurt? were they beaten? And what does NATO have to do with police and protestors? Im confused. What I wanted to say was that the newspapers often report about demonstrations making the demonstrators the bad ones. Why? Because it makes the news more interesting. [img]smile.gif[/img] Now, I'm not saying all demonstrators are peaceful; sometimes there are a couple of people that are violent, but then usually the whole crowd gets it. And the police often make it worse. [img]smile.gif[/img] And I frequently see the newspapers showing the police "beating" a supposedly innocent peaceful demonstrator only to forget to mention that the guy threw a bottle or rock moments before they got the camera on him. You say the police make it worse? What exactly should they do? Allow anarchy and ignore the bad guys so they do not upset the other "peacful" people? You give a couple of examples, howabout the one of Reginald Denney. An innocent truck driver, yanked out of his truck and then beaten, untill some of the crowd decided to start breaking cinder blocks on his head. ------------------------------- I personally think it's wrong to tell one side of the protesters to go behind a fence. If you put them behind a fence, then put them all there. The Pro-Bush and Anti-Bush. [img]smile.gif[/img]

Protestors are seperated from non-protestors for good reason. The police arent just making this stuff up. The science of crowd control and crowd dynamics is well established and if you allow opposition factions to meet, you immeasurably increase the possibility of violent altercations. You do know they do things for a reason yes?

One last thought on this is that in the US you have the 1st ammendment right to free speach, it doesnt say anywhere that you are free to force anyone to listen to you....or that you have the right to disrupt a public function.

[K T Ong]

Perhaps MagiK should rename himself 'the Devil's Advocate'.

Originally posted by Moni: P.S. and no, I can't show you one person who has been imprisoned for speaking their mind (against government policies) but I can show you someone who has since been abused by the system they protested because they chose to protest...me...and I have since been jailed for crimes I didn't commit.

Didn't know you've been jailed before, Moni... Must have been terrible... Glad it's all in the past now.

[ 09-09-2002, 10:31 AM: Message edited by: K T Ong ]

Originally posted by K T Ong: Perhaps MagiK should rename himself 'the Devil's Advocate'.

Are you accusing me of satanism?
No im not playing devils advocate here. I think I might just be giving law enforcement a fair shake in this discussion is all. In some countries I admit the police are a terror inspiring organization but in the west, the police don't just go around beating "innocent" people who are just standing around minding their own business, usually the people who are reporting this are just trying to justify their own bad acts, at least in my experience this is the case. There are no absolutes however and exceptions do occur.

[ 09-09-2002, 11:36 AM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

Originally posted by Spelca: quote: Originally posted by John D Harris: Originally posted by Spelca: How did they know one of the anti people wasn't hiding in the pro crowd? If I were one of them that's what I'd do. [img]tongue.gif[/img] *poke* [img]tongue.gif[/img] Well I debated with myself about even mentioning it, but historicaly most, if not all of the attempts and sucesses on the lives of leaders came from an Anti hiding in the pro crowds. But if the Secret Service had their way the President would never be in public.

I think they removed the anti and left the pro ones right next to the road where he passed because they wanted to make him look good. Or maybe they wanted him to think he was really loved. Hehe. [img]tongue.gif[/img] [/QUOTE] or perhaps they just wanted a pleasent afternoon with no problems so that familys and children would be safe and could enjoy seeing the president in person (something that not everyone gets the chance to do)
[img]smile.gif[/img]

Originally posted by Wulfere: Now this is the kind of post I like to read. You have differing opinions, but still manage to respect each other. Ok well maybe there are a couple digs in there. Having not worked with the Secret Service, most folks have no idea the amount of work and stress they are under. Each time ANY President goes into the open they are in danger. From Crack-Pots or from Terrorists. The Secret Service does alot of work for every event the President attends. They are there weeks in advance and have plans and more plans and contingecy plans for those plans. They take the Job very seriously. Just ask the guys who threw themselves infront of Reagan if they would do it again. You can't put everyone behind a barrier. But, you do have to watch the more extreme elements more closely. People individually are smart, thoughtful (for the most part) and generally fun to be around. But, in a crowd that changes, and it can get ugly very fast. Common sense can fly out the window in a hurry. All you need is a leader with an agenda and a little charisma. It's a plain fact. That's the way we are made. Exactly what I was saying about crowd dynamics only ever so much more elegantly stated [img]smile.gif[/img] It all boils down to what you want to believe. How you percieve the events and interpret them. Personally, I prefer to believe in the system. Because if you choose not to what do you have? Are there problems? Yes. There always will be, it will never be perfect. But, we try. Individually and as a people this Nation struggles for each gain and when we fall we have to grit our teeth and claw our way back. No system is perfect. Change is the only real constant. It's how we ride the tides of change and events that define us. Am I babbling? WOW! It's three hours past my bedtime. Take care all. God Bless.

[K T Ong]

Originally posted by MagiK: Are you accusing me of satanism? No im not playing devils advocate here. I think I might just be giving law enforcement a fair shake in this discussion is all. In some countries I admit the police are a terror inspiring organization but in the west, the police don't just go around beating "innocent" people who are just standing around minding their own business, usually the people we are reporting this are just trying to justify their own bad acts, at least in my experience this is the case. There are no absolutes however and exceptions do occur.

I'm not commenting on your posts to this thread in particular, just your general knack for... exasperating other people...

As for policemen in the West never going around and beating up innocents: well, I've never been to the West myself -- apart from Adelaide, which is just a tiny bit of the West -- so, sorry, I'm not going to take your word for it until I see it for myself. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

[ 09-09-2002, 11:14 AM: Message edited by: K T Ong ]

[Donut]

Originally posted by Attalus: Also, why are all these activities by the government on monitoring groups, etc., construed as denying or forbidding them? The second amendment says that you may say what you like, but not that you can do it anywhere that you please.

Hey Attalus - I hate to be picky and I may well be wrong. But isn't the second amendment the one that gives you the right to shoot people?

Originally posted by K T Ong: As for policemen in the West never going around and beating up innocents: well, I've never been to the West myself -- apart from Adelaide, which is just a tiny bit of the West -- so, sorry, I'm not going to take your word for it until I see it for myself. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

I try never to say never, I always (almost) qualify my statements as I believe that there are no absolutes [img]smile.gif[/img] Umm Where is Adelaide?
Since our views are so polar opposites Im not surprised that you do not believe me. But it is true that for the most part western police are not out there repressing the masses [img]smile.gif[/img] As for my lack of writing skill and accumen, I addressed that in the other thread, and I know what you mean, I do need to work on that.

[ 09-09-2002, 11:43 AM: Message edited by: MagiK ]