[Peace-discuss] Free Speech
Ricky Baldwin
baldwinricky at yahoo.com
Tue Jan 6 15:27:34 CST 2004
Does anybody else remember scenes like this from Boris
and Natasha's visits home? Does that make us "moose
and squirrel"?
--- Al Kagan <akagan at uiuc.edu> wrote:
> >From: "Katia Roberto" <kroberto at uga.edu>
> >To: SRRT Action Council <srrtac-l at ala.org>
> >Subject: [SRRTAC-L:12484] Forwarding for Jason
> Morris
> >Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 14:36:07 -0500
> >X-Priority: 3
> >X-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean
> >Reply-To: srrtac-l at ala.org
> >Sender: owner-srrtac-l at ala.org
> >X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP
> for more information
> >X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.0 required=5.0
> > tests=BAYES_20,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT
> > version=2.54
> >X-Spam-Level:
> >X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.54
> (1.174.2.17-2003-05-11-exp)
> >
> > > Received: from mail2.vcu.edu (mail2.vcu.edu
> [128.172.1.135])
> >> by ala1.ala.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id
> i05Jkk718854
> >> for <srrtac-l at ala.org>; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 13:46:47
> -0600 (CST)
> >> Received: from vcu.edu ([128.172.144.182])
> >> by mail2.vcu.edu (8.12.0/8.11.3) with ESMTP id
> i05JLi02302262
> >> for <srrtac-l at ala.org>; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 14:21:44
> -0500
> >> Message-ID: <3FF9B948.6080001 at vcu.edu>
> >> Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 14:21:44 -0500
> >> From: Jason Morris <jamorris at vcu.edu>
> >> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT
> 5.0; en-US; rv:1.3)
> >Gecko/20030312
> >> X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
> >> MIME-Version: 1.0
> >> To: srrtac-l at ala.org
> >> Subject: Free Speech & "Free Speech Zones"
> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii;
> format=flowed
> >> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> >> X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the
> ISP for more
> >information
> >> X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
> >>
> >> * Quarantining dissent
> >> How the Secret Service protects Bush from free
> speech *
> >>
> >>
> >> When President Bush travels around the United
> States, the Secret
> >Service
> >> visits the location ahead of time and orders
> local police to set up
> >> "free speech zones" or "protest zones," where
> people opposed to Bush
> >> policies (and sometimes sign-carrying
> supporters) are quarantined.
> >These
> >> zones routinely succeed in keeping protesters
> out of presidential
> >sight
> >> and outside the view of media covering the
> event.
> >>
> >> When Bush went to the Pittsburgh area on Labor
> Day 2002, 65-year-old
> >> retired steel worker Bill Neel was there to
> greet him with a sign
> >> proclaiming, "The Bush family must surely love
> the poor, they made
> >so
> >> many of us."
> >>
> >> The local police, at the Secret Service's
> behest, set up a
> >"designated
> >> free-speech zone" on a baseball field surrounded
> by a chain-link
> >fence a
> >> third of a mile from the location of Bush's
> speech.
> >>
> >> The police cleared the path of the motorcade of
> all critical signs,
> >but
> >> folks with pro-Bush signs were permitted to line
> the president's
> >path.
> >> Neel refused to go to the designated area and
> was arrested for
> >> disorderly conduct; the police also confiscated
> his sign.
> >>
> >> Neel later commented, "As far as I'm concerned,
> the whole country is
> >a
> >> free-speech zone. If the Bush administration has
> its way, anyone who
> >> criticizes them will be out of sight and out of
> mind."
> >>
> >> At Neel's trial, police Detective John
> Ianachione testified that the
> >> Secret Service told local police to confine
> "people that were there
> >> making a statement pretty much against the
> president and his views"
> >in a
> >> so-called free- speech area.
> >>
> >> Paul Wolf, one of the top officials in the
> Allegheny County Police
> >> Department, told Salon that the Secret Service
> "come in and do a
> >site
> >> survey, and say, 'Here's a place where the
> people can be, and we'd
> >like
> >> to have any protesters put in a place that is
> able to be secured.' "
> >>
> >> Pennsylvania District Judge Shirley Rowe Trkula
> threw out the
> >disorderly
> >> conduct charge against Neel, declaring, "I
> believe this is America.
> >> Whatever happened to 'I don't agree with you,
> but I'll defend to the
> >> death your right to say it'?"
> >>
> >> Similar suppressions have occurred during Bush
> visits to Florida. A
> >> recent St. Petersburg Times editorial noted, "At
> a Bush rally at
> >Legends
> >> Field in 2001, three demonstrators -- two of
> whom were
> >grandmothers --
> >> were arrested for holding up small handwritten
> protest signs outside
> >the
> >> designated zone. And last year, seven protesters
> were arrested when
> >Bush
> >> came to a rally at the USF Sun Dome. They had
> refused to be cordoned
> >off
> >> into a protest zone hundreds of yards from the
> entrance to the
> >Dome."
> >>
> >> One of the arrested protesters was a 62-year-old
> man holding up a
> >sign,
> >> "War is good business. Invest your sons." The
> seven were charged
> >with
> >> trespassing, "obstructing without violence and
> disorderly conduct."
> >>
> >> Police have repressed protesters during several
> Bush visits to the
> >St.
> >> Louis area as well. When Bush visited on Jan.
> 22, 150 people
> >carrying
> >> signs were shunted far away from the main action
> and effectively
> >> quarantined.
> >>
> >> Denise Lieberman of the American Civil Liberties
> Union of Eastern
> >> Missouri commented, "No one could see them from
> the street. In
> >addition,
> >> the media were not allowed to talk to them. The
> police would not
> >allow
> >> any media inside the protest area and wouldn't
> allow any of the
> >> protesters out of the protest zone to talk to
> the media."
> >>
> >> When Bush stopped by a Boeing plant to talk to
> workers, Christine
> >Mains
> >> and her 5-year-old daughter disobeyed orders to
> move to a small
> >protest
> >> area far from the action. Police arrested Mains
> and took her and her
> >> crying daughter away in separate squad cars.
> >>
> >> The Justice Department is now prosecuting Brett
> Bursey, who was
> >arrested
> >> for holding a "No War for Oil" sign at a Bush
> visit to Columbia,
> >S.C.
> >> Local police, acting under Secret Service
> orders, established a
> >> "free-speech zone" half a mile from where Bush
> would speak. Bursey
> >was
> >> standing amid hundreds of people carrying signs
> praising the
> >president.
> >> Police told Bursey to remove himself to the
> "free-speech zone."
> >>
> >> Bursey refused and was arrested. Bursey said
> that he asked the
> >police
> >> officer if "it was the content of my sign, and
> he said, 'Yes, sir,
> >it's
> >> the content of your sign that's the problem.' "
> Bursey stated that
> >he
> >> had already moved 200 yards from where Bush was
> supposed to speak.
> >> Bursey later complained, "The problem was, the
> restricted area kept
> >> moving. It was wherever I happened to be
> standing."
> >>
> >> Bursey was charged with trespassing. Five months
> later, the charge
> >was
> >> dropped because South Carolina law prohibits
> arresting people for
> >> trespassing on public property. But the Justice
> Department -- in the
> >> person of U.S. Attorney Strom Thurmond Jr. --
> quickly jumped in,
> >> charging Bursey with violating a rarely enforced
> federal law
> >regarding
> >> "entering a restricted area around the president
> of the United
> >States."
> >>
> >> If convicted, Bursey faces a six-month trip up
> the river and a
> >$5,000
> >> fine. Federal Magistrate Bristow Marchant denied
> Bursey's request
> >for a
> >> jury trial because his violation is categorized
> as a petty offense.
> >Some
> >> observers believe that the feds are seeking to
> set a precedent in a
> >> conservative state such as South Carolina that
> could then be used
> >> against protesters nationwide.
> >>
> >> Bursey's trial took place on Nov. 12 and 13. His
> lawyers sought the
> >> Secret Service documents they believed would lay
> out the official
> >> policies on restricting critical speech at
> presidential visits. The
> >Bush
> >> administration sought to block all access to the
> documents, but
> >Marchant
> >> ruled that the lawyers could have limited
> access.
> >>
> >> Bursey sought to subpoena Attorney General John
> Ashcroft and
> >> presidential adviser Karl Rove to testify.
> Bursey lawyer Lewis Pitts
> >> declared, "We intend to find out from Mr.
> Ashcroft why and how the
> >> decision to prosecute Mr. Bursey was reached."
> The magistrate
> >refused,
> >> however, to enforce the subpoenas. Secret
> Service agent Holly Abel
> >> testified at the trial that Bursey was told to
> move to the
> >"free-speech
> >> zone" but refused to cooperate.
> >>
> >> The feds have offered some bizarre rationales
> for hog-tying
> >protesters.
> >> Secret Service agent Brian Marr explained to
> National Public Radio,
> >> "These individuals may be so involved with
> trying to shout their
> >support
> >> or nonsupport that inadvertently they may walk
> out into the
> >motorcade
> >> route and be injured. And that is really the
> reason why we set these
> >> places up, so we can make sure that they have
> the right of free
> >speech,
> >> but, two, we want to be sure that they are able
> to go home at the
> >end of
> >> the evening and not be injured in any way."
> Except for having their
> > > constitutional rights shredded.
> >>
> >> The ACLU, along with several other
> organizations, is suing the
> >Secret
> >> Service for what it charges is a pattern and
> practice of suppressing
> >> protesters at Bush events in Arizona,
> California, Connecticut,
> >Michigan,
> >> New Jersey, New Mexico, Texas and elsewhere. The
> ACLU's Witold
> >Walczak
> >> said of the protesters, "The individuals we are
> talking about didn't
> >> pose a security threat; they posed a political
> threat."
> >>
> >> The Secret Service is duty-bound to protect the
> president. But it is
> >> ludicrous to presume that would-be terrorists
> are lunkheaded enough
> >to
> >> carry anti-Bush signs when carrying pro-Bush
> signs would give them
> >much
> >> closer access. And even a policy of removing all
> people carrying
> >signs
> >> -- as has happened in some demonstrations -- is
> pointless because
> >> potential attackers would simply avoid carrying
> signs. Assuming that
> >> terrorists are as unimaginative and predictable
> as the average
> >federal
> >> bureaucrat is not a recipe for presidential
> longevity.
> >>
> >> The Bush administration's anti-protester bias
> proved embarrassing
> >for
> >> two American allies with long traditions of
> raucous free speech,
> >> resulting in some of the most repressive
> restrictions in memory in
> >free
> >> countries.
> >>
> >> When Bush visited Australia in October, Sydney
> Morning Herald
> >columnist
> >> Mark Riley observed, "The basic right of freedom
> of speech will
> >adopt a
> >> new interpretation during the Canberra visits
> this week by George
> >Bush
> >> and his Chinese counterpart, Hu Jintao.
> Protesters will be free to
> >speak
> >> as much as they like just as long as they can't
> be heard."
> >>
> >> Demonstrators were shunted to an area away from
> the Federal
> >Parliament
> >> building and prohibited from using any public
> address system in the
> >area.
> >>
> >> For Bush's recent visit to London, the White
> House demanded that
> >British
> >> police ban all protest marches, close down the
> center of the city
> >and
> >> impose a "virtual three-day shutdown of central
> London in a bid to
> >foil
> >> disruption of the visit by anti-war protesters,"
> according to
> >Britain's
> >> Evening Standard. But instead of a "free-speech
> zone," the Bush
> >> administration demanded an "exclusion zone" to
> protect Bush from
> >> protesters' messages.
> >>
> >> Such unprecedented restrictions did not inhibit
> Bush from portraying
> >> himself as a champion of freedom during his
> visit. In a speech at
> >> Whitehall on Nov. 19, Bush hyped the "forward
> strategy of freedom"
> >and
> >> declared, "We seek the advance of freedom and
> the peace that freedom
> >> brings."
> >>
> >> Attempts to suppress protesters become more
> disturbing in light of
> >the
> >> Homeland Security Department's recommendation
> that local police
> >> departments view critics of the war on terrorism
> as potential
> >> terrorists. In a May terrorist advisory, the
> Homeland Security
> >> Department warned local law enforcement agencies
> to keep an eye on
> >> anyone who "expressed dislike of attitudes and
> decisions of the U.S.
> >> government." If police vigorously followed this
> advice, millions of
> >> Americans could be added to the official lists
> of suspected
> >terrorists.
> >>
> >> Protesters have claimed that police have
> assaulted them during
> >> demonstrations in New York, Washington and
> elsewhere.
> >>
> >> One of the most violent government responses to
> an antiwar protest
> >> occurred when local police and the federally
> funded California
> >> Anti-Terrorism Task Force fired rubber bullets
> and tear gas at
> >peaceful
> >> protesters and innocent bystanders at the Port
> of Oakland, injuring
> >a
> >> number of people.
> >>
> >> When the police attack sparked a geyser of media
> criticism, Mike van
> >> Winkle, the spokesman for the California
> Anti-Terrorism Information
> >> Center told the Oakland Tribune, "You can make
> an easy kind of a
> >link
> >> that, if you have a protest group protesting a
> war where the cause
> >> that's being fought against is international
> terrorism, you might
> >have
> >> terrorism at that protest. You can almost argue
> that a protest
> >against
> >> that is a terrorist act."
> >>
> > > Van Winkle justified classifying protesters as
> terrorists: "I've
> >heard
> >> terrorism described as anything that is violent
> or has an economic
> >> impact, and shutting down a port certainly would
> have some economic
> > > impact. Terrorism isn't just bombs going off
> and killing people."
> >>
> >> Such aggressive tactics become more ominous in
> the light of the Bush
> >> administration's advocacy, in its Patriot II
> draft legislation, of
> >> nullifying all judicial consent decrees
> restricting state and local
> >> police from spying on those groups who may
> oppose government
> >policies.
> >>
> >> On May 30, 2002, Ashcroft effectively abolished
> restrictions on FBI
> >> surveillance of Americans' everyday lives first
> imposed in 1976. One
> >FBI
> >> internal newsletter encouraged FBI agents to
> conduct more interviews
> >> with antiwar activists "for plenty of reasons,
> chief of which it
> >will
> >> enhance the paranoia endemic in such circles and
> will further
> >service to
> >> get the point across that there is an FBI agent
> behind every
> >mailbox."
> >>
> >> The FBI took a shotgun approach toward
> protesters partly because of
> >the
> >> FBI's "belief that dissident speech and
> association should be
> >prevented
> >> because they were incipient steps toward the
> possible ultimate
> >> commission of act which might be criminal,"
> according to a Senate
> >report.
> >>
> >> On Nov. 23 news broke that the FBI is actively
> conducting
> >surveillance
> >> of antiwar demonstrators, supposedly to "blunt
> potential violence by
> >> extremist elements," according to a Reuters
> interview with a federal
> >law
> >> enforcement official.
> >>
> >> Given the FBI's expansive definition of
> "potential violence" in the
> >> past, this is a net that could catch almost any
> group or individual
> >who
> >> falls into official disfavor.
> >>
> >> /James Bovard is the author of "Terrorism &
> Tyranny: Trampling
> >Freedom,
> >> Justice, and Peace to Rid the World of Evil."
> This article is
> >adapted
> >> from one that appeared in the Dec. 15 issue of
> the American
> >Conservative./
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Al Kagan
> African Studies Bibliographer and Professor of
> Library Administration
> Africana Unit, Room 328
> University of Illinois Library
> 1408 W. Gregory Drive
> Urbana, IL 61801, USA
>
> tel. 217-333-6519
> fax. 217-333-2214
> e-mail. akagan at uiuc.edu
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.cu.groogroo.com
>
http://lists.cu.groogroo.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus
More information about the Peace-discuss
mailing list