Freedom of Speech in the Bush era

“Posts of the following nature are not acceptable in Trail Talk:

Posts that express physical or verbal threats towards another poster”

“Violink's got sand in his vagina again.

Anytime someone says, "Boo!" he takes a hit off his puffer and runs to Daddy.”

“But if the poster is a troll ( a fictional charachter meant to evidence the persons gutless ego) is that really a threat. I mean can I really make a terrorsitic threat against the Easter Bunny?”

“Cute XL...so you think threatening the Easter Bunny is equal to threatening a troll? Violence is violence it does not represent quality.

Now if you are protecting something I think violence may be necessary. I for one KNOW EB and he is pretty cool..so drop him as a topic.”

“"Hasenfeffer! I want hasenfeffer!"”

“Here we go again,,,the whole Rabbit Season Duck season debate....I will start it



Wabbit Season!”

“Duck season! Shoot! Shoot!”

“A Denver-area man filed a lawsuit today against a member of the Secret Service for causing him to be arrested after he approached Vice President Dick Cheney in Beaver Creek this summer and criticized him for his policies concerning Iraq.
Attorney David Lane said that on June 16, Steve Howards was walking his 7-year-old son to a piano practice, when he saw Cheney surrounded by a group of people in an outdoor mall area, shaking hands and posing for pictures with several people.

According to the lawsuit filed at U.S. District Court in Denver, Howards and his son walked to about two-to-three feet from where Cheney was standing, and said to the vice president, "I think your policies in Iraq are reprehensible," or words to that effect, then walked on.

Ten minutes later, according to Howards' lawsuit, he and his son were walking back through the same area, when they were approached by Secret Service agent Virgil D. "Gus" Reichle Jr., who asked Howards if he had "assaulted" the vice president. Howards denied doing so, but was nonetheless placed in handcuffs and taken to the Eagle County Jail.

The lawsuit states that the Secret Service agent instructed that Howards should be issued a summons for harassment, but that on July 6 the Eagle County District Attorney's Office dismissed all charges against Howards.

The lawsuit filed today alleges that Howards was arrested in retaliation for having exercised his First Amendment right of free speech, and that his arrest violated his Fourth Amendment protection against unlawful seizure.

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_5039230,00.html”

“That's funny, ol' Vile didn't complain a peep when Clinton was trying to get ABC to cancel the 9/11 TV show that showed Clinton in a bad light.
[VBG]”

“500 FBI FILES...accessed by a fired ex bar bouncer who was the CHIEF of White House Security...who noone apparently hired...I think that says it all for the VIOLIN Party dedication to freedoms.”

“Deflect, deflect, deflect.


How about one single comment on the actual story?”

“Violin, free speech does not apply to anyone critical of the fuhrer or his goons.
last edited: 10/04/06 1:56:58 PM”

“There's one!”

“How about one single comment on the actual story of Clinton forcing ABC to edit their show to please him, and the Dem leadership threatening ABC with the FCC pulling their license?
{VBG]”

“The woman on Hilton Head who spent the night in jail for telling SLICK..."YOU SUCK" from across the way.

then there is

http://www.cnsnews.com/indepth/archive/199812/IND19981211d.html

protestor beaten by UNION THUGS then charged by the THUGS ...only in Clinton's AMERKA

Speaking of Freedom of Speech, here you go:

Shake Hands with Bill (or Else!)

by T.L. Hubeart Jr.
©1997 by T.L. Hubeart Jr.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is a lesson to be learned from the story of the Rev. Rob Schenck. And from the story of Patricia Mendoza. And from the story of William J. Kelly. It is that criticizing the President of the United States can be hazardous to your freedom. An improper word at a Christmas Eve service can get you detained by the Secret Service. Declining to shake Mr. Clinton's hand at an impromptu stop can prompt an interrogation of your "sexual orientation," and court charges. And an inappropriate question at a town meeting can win you twenty-seven hours in police custody, shackled in handcuffs and leg irons.
It is likely that few people have heard the stories of Rev. Schenck, or Mrs. Mendoza, or Mr. Kelly. Newspaper coverage of their stories has been extremely slight. However, the Mendoza case did become a cause célèbre on talk radio, and the conservative Washington Times tracked its progress, which caused the mainstream press to offer some begrudging reporting on it. Apparently speaking for the media elite, Rekha Basu of the Des Moines Register poured scorn on Rush Limbaugh and other conservative talk radio personalities for "making a heroine" of Mrs. Mendoza. In righteous indignation, Basu asked, "Since when do you earn heroine status for profaning a president?"{1} (The use of the verb "profane" is intriguing, as it appears to reveal Mr. Clinton's demigod-like status in the minds of his media "priests." As Gideon's father once said to a similarly idolatrous group, "Will ye plead for Baal? Will ye save him?"{2} )

The Schenck incident occurred at Christmas at the Washington National Cathedral. The Washington Post reported Rev. Schenck's account of it, that "while waiting to receive communion, he leaned over the altar rail toward the president's nearby seat and quietly told Clinton: 'God will hold you to account, Mr. President.'" Apparently the comment was intended in reference to the president's notorious veto of the partial-birth abortion ban. There was no further interaction between the two men, but Rev. Schenck was nevertheless physically detained by the Secret Service while leaving the cathedral, had his wallet searched and his driver's license extracted, and during this search was told he could not contact a lawyer. One of the agents "quoted the president as having complained . . . that Schenck had 'said words' to him."{3} Not surprisingly, a Secret Service spokesperson later vouched for the appropriateness of the agents' actions.{4}

Now it is true that the Secret Service's job in protecting the president is a thankless one, and it would be understandable if in isolated cases they did overreact to prevent a potential threat. Several alleged threats on this particular president's life have already been acted upon by the Secret Service, including some via e-mail, a plot by a white supremacist group in the Midwest, and an incident involving a Montana man who said that "demons" had told him to kill the president.{5} Barricades were erected on Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House during Clinton's first term, apparently as a security measure.{6}

Surely it was in poor taste, at the very least, for the Rev. Schenck to say what he said in the midst of a church service, even though his detention was out of proportion to his perceived crime of having "said words" that the president didn't like. But given the new dangers against terrorism both abroad and at home, and the rise of domestic crackpots such as the pilot of a plane which crashed into the White House in 1995,{7} one could perhaps chalk up an isolated incident like that involving the Rev. Schenck to overzealous, but not malicious, performance of security functions.

However, there is also the case of Patricia Mendoza to consider. Mrs. Mendoza and her husband were attending a festival in Chicago on July 2, 1996, when President Clinton, making an impromptu campaign stop, approached her to shake hands with her.{8} Mrs. Mendoza reportedly told Clinton, "You suck, and those boys died"--a reference to the deaths of 19 servicemen in a bombing in Saudi Arabia the previous month.{9} Following this, according to a videotape of the incident, Clinton pointed Mrs. Mendoza out to White House Deputy Counsel Bruce Lindsey, and a black Secret Service agent pulled aside another agent and gestured in the woman's direction. After Clinton's departure, two Secret Service agents questioned her, and the Chicago police arrested her and her husband, alleging disorderly conduct.{10}

Several features of the whole affair-- such as the length of time between the incident and the Secret Service's intervention,{11} questions during the interrogation about the woman's "sexual orientation,"{12} the failure to file federal charges (despite claims initially that a threat on the president's life had been made),{13} and the fact that, even after the disorderly conduct charges were dropped, city officials made noises about filing municipal charges against the couple{14}--suggest a vendetta executed with Clinton's tacit approval. Rep. Robert Livingston, Louisiana Republican, put it this way:


Is this going to be the norm? If you criticize the president, are you going to be arrested by a bunch of federal agents and thrown in jail overnight? That's a frightening thought. . . . I think on the heels of this FBI investigation, with these FBI files in the White House, this kind of symbolizes an appalling lack of respect for human rights and for the rights of people to speak out in this country.{15}
No doubt the Clinton White House did not expect the outrage that followed the incident and its highlighting on C-SPAN and several talk radio programs.{16} The Secret Service quickly backpedaled from the issue, while complaining of "continuing media interest."{17} A brief hearing was held in Chicago on August 27--the second day of the Democratic National Convention--at which time the case was postponed. (A member of the Mendozas' defense team commented that "we all know the reason the case was continued. They want to wait until the convention is out of town."{18}) Then, in October--as previously noted--the disorderly conduct charges were dropped.

Nor is the case of the Mendozas unprecedented. Ruth Larson of the Washington Times noted similarities between it and that of William J. Kelly, described as "a Chicago-area activist," who was seized and detained by police for more than a day, after he asked President Clinton an embarrassing question at a July 1993 town meeting. After Kelly's challenge to the president to honor his middle-class tax cut pledge, "Clinton went berserk," according to Kelly; "he pounded the podium, his face got red, and then he started lecturing me." Kelly was allowed to leave the hotel where the president was speaking, but three hours later police arrested him at his parents' home and held him for 27 hours. Perhaps no one should be surprised that the charges against Kelly, like those against the Mendozas, were dropped six months later.{19}

Of course one would not be completely fair to the president if one did not record that there have been some incidents in which the Secret Service does not appear to have been called out to detain, harass, and/or intimidate an ideological opponent. Valerie Parker of Bloomington, Illinois, interrupted a Clinton jog in California by shouting that he was "a disgrace to the office of the presidency, to [his] gender, and to this nation," as well as a "draft-dodging, yellow-bellied liar" and numerous other insults. However, on this occasion, there was apparently no need for the Secret Service to do more than ensure that Ms. Parker kept a respectable distance from Clinton, since a supportive crowd shouted her down.{20} It is interesting that Parker, whose reported invective could easily have seemed threatening in the eyes of the president's security detail, did not receive the treatment afforded the far less threatening Rev. Schenck or Mrs. Mendoza. Perhaps Mr. Clinton feels that when the bystanders are already behind you, having your opponent arrested in front of them does not serve your public relations interests!

The case of an AIDS activist who calls himself "Luke Sissyfag" is even more notable. In December of 1993, just over four months after Kelly's forcible detention, Mr. "Sissyfag" interrupted a Clinton speech at Georgetown Medical Center in Washington by shouting, "Talk is cheap, and we need action. You're hiding behind the quilts. You are doing nothing." However, the president showed even more magnanimity to this individual than he would later show Ms. Parker. "Part of my job is to be a lightning rod," said Mr. Clinton, "to lift the hopes and aspirations of the American people, even though there's no way I can now keep everybody alive who already has AIDS." Mr. "Sissyfag" was not incarcerated,{21} and he went on to heckle Health Secretary Donna Shalala's speech the next month at the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League,{22} and to disrupt another event attended by the president, an Easter service at Washington's Foundry United Methodist Church{23} (shades of the Rev. Schenck incident?). Perhaps Mr. Clinton reasoned that his need to avoid appearing "politically incorrect" by detaining a homosexual activist outweighed Mr. "Sissyfag's" potential menace to presidential safety.

It appears, then, that an AIDS activist can harass the president and his administration with impunity. And an average citizen like Parker, if she's lucky enough to catch Mr. Clinton while he is buoyed by favorable crowd vibes, can also tell him off without any reprisal. But one cannot count on this luck at all times, as the cases of Mrs. Mendoza, Mr. Kelly, and most recently Rev. Schenck warn us. Freedom of speech has definite restrictions when it comes to the space around this president--not for leftist AIDS activists, but for those on the right of Clinton. (In fact, perhaps the interrogation mentioned above regarding Mrs. Mendoza's "sexual orientation" can be best understood when we consider it in light of the "Sissyfag" episode. One wouldn't want to mistakenly incarcerate an AIDS activist, especially before an election!)

The lesson to be learned from these events is clear. If, like Mrs. Mendoza, you find Bill Clinton barreling toward you to shake hands with you, please keep yourself from going to jail by shaking his hand and keeping your mouth shut. (You can always use a good strong hand soap afterwards!)

(January 1997)
last edited: 10/04/06 2:07:27 PM”

“Maryland School Sued for Refusing to Let Girl Read Bibleduring her lunch break

By Meghan Mulhern
CNSNews.com Correspondent
October 04, 2006

(CNSNews.com) - A conservative civil liberties group has filed suit against a school in Greenbelt, Md., for violating the constitutional rights of a seventh-grader who was allegedly threatened with discipline for reading her Bible in school.

"This was a young Christian girl, who has been a Christian for less than a year, and so this is really important for her," said John W. Whitehead, president and founder of the Rutherford Institute, which represents Amber Mangum in the case.

"She is in a public school where there is no religious influence. So she eats her lunch, she's taking a break, she's reading her Bible, and this school official comes up to her and says she's going to be disciplined if she doesn't stop reading it," Whitehead added.

The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland against Dwight D. Eisenhower Middle School. Eighth grade Vice Principal Jeannette Rainey and Principal Charoscar Coleman are among the defendants in the suit.

According to the student's mother, Maryanne Mangum, Amber was reading her Bible after finishing her lunch when Rainey gave her a "verbal warning" to put the Bible away.

Amber was told she "was not allowed to read it, and if it happened again," Amber would be punished, her mother said. "She didn't take the Bible back to school."

The school district's policy, along with the guidelines under the U.S. Department of Education's 2003 No Child Left Behind Act, gives students the right to read Bibles or other religious scriptures during lunch hour, recess or other non-instructional times.

"NCLBA, which is federal law that came in under the Bush administration, actually has this provision stating that students have a right to read their Bibles or other religious scriptures during the school day. It provides for that. It says also that you can actually get your federal funding taken away if you violate the NCLBA," Whitehead explained.

But Ellen Johnson, president of American Atheists, said most of the time, "right-wing groups" that file lawsuits "exaggerate what happened in school, and that is usually brought out later in the case."

"What probably happened is this kid, I'll bet you, was being disruptive. I bet this kid was proselytizing, was preaching, doing something that was annoying other kids and was told to stop. Kids don't normally want to read the Bible at lunch time-I don't care who they are. It's just not something kids want to do," said Johnson.

According to Maryanne Mangum, her daughter became a Christian a year ago. "She accepted the Lord as her savior and is really into church, church activities, and she is really into her Bible. This upset her very much, that she could not do something that she enjoyed doing," she said.

The middle school would not respond to any phone calls or e-mail requests for comment. The school has given no response to anyone, not the Mangums or the Rutherford Institute. The Prince George's County Public School's communications officer had no comment.

"They haven't said anything. They've been very quiet, not saying a word. I don't think there is much of a defense. This is not a teacher reading the Bible in the classroom. This is not a teacher reading the Bible in the lunchroom. This is a child in her own free-time reading the Bible. That's what makes it so outrageous," Whitehead said.


http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200610/CUL20061004a.html

############################################

One would think a good father like violin would be more interested in something like this to be outraged about.
[VBG]”

“Great source, buffoons.

Cybercast News Service (CNS) is a subsidiary of the conservative news monitoring group, the Media Research Center (MRC). Originally calling itself the "Conservative News Service," CNS changed its name to Cybercast in 2000.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Cybercast_News_Service”

“So?”

“Mad Dog Conservative News Service??”

“That was only the lead paragraph in a rather extensive and well documented rebuttal.

You can read can't you?”

“http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/02/AR2006100201238.html

PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY
Bible-Reading Student Gets Lesson in Litigation

By Eric Rich
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, October 3, 2006; Page B04

Amber Mangum was a frequent reader during lunch breaks at her Prince George's County middle school, silently soaking up the adventures of Harry Potter and other tales in the spare minutes before afternoon classes. The habit was never viewed as a problem -- not, a lawsuit alleges, until the book she was reading was the Bible.

A vice principal at Dwight D. Eisenhower Middle School in Laurel last month ordered Amber, then 12, to stop reading the Bible or face punishment, according to a lawsuit filed Friday by Amber's mother. The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Greenbelt, alleges that the vice principal's actions violated the girl's civil rights.


"Amber's a new Christian, and she's trying to learn all she can," said Maryann Mangum, the girl's mother. "She reads her Bible and she goes to Sunday school. . . . It really upset me when she was not allowed to read it on her own time."

John White, a spokesman for the school system, said administrators learned of the lawsuit Friday and were not prepared to comment on its claims. "We're just beginning to look into it," he said.

Mangum said her daughter was reading her Bible on Sept. 14 when Vice Principal Jeanetta Rainey approached. According to Mangum and the lawsuit, Rainey told Amber that reading the Bible violated school policy and that she would face discipline if she continued to do so.

Later that day, Amber recounted the episode to Mangum, who is her adoptive mother and also her biological grandmother. James Baker, a family friend, sent a note to the school asking that the principal identify any policy barring students from reading the Bible during their free time.

The note quoted a section of the school system's administrative procedures, saying that students "may read their Bibles or other scriptures, say grace before meals, and pray before tests to the same extent they may engage in comparable, non-disruptive activities."

The principal, Charoscar Coleman, did not respond, the lawsuit says. A friend at Mangum's church suggested that Mangum contact the Rutherford Institute, a nonprofit legal organization specializing in cases that involve issues of religious and civil liberties.

The institute's president, John W. Whitehead, said yesterday that the law is clear and that Amber's rights were violated. He said the lawsuit does not specifically seek monetary damages but rather that a judge declare that students cannot be barred from reading the Bible during free time at school.

"This is a seventh-grader who's probably overwhelmed by what's going on around her," Whitehead said. "This is a chance for her to get some comfort during the day. . . . What would you rather have a kid doing, throwing spit wads or sitting there silently reading a few passages from the Bible?"”

“Change your handle to Falwell and that greasy creature will probably kiss your ass, Reverend.”

“MarkO, don't you need to run home and do the dishes? ;-)”

“Isn't there a hurricane out there with your name and address, GrimyGuts?”

“Nope, but thanks for asking.”

“its appalling that someone is not allowed to read a religious text of their choosing in their free time in a public school.”

““Great source, buffoons.

Cybercast News Service (CNS) is a subsidiary of the conservative news monitoring group, the Media Research Center (MRC). Originally calling itself the "Conservative News Service," CNS changed its name to Cybercast in 2000.
"

The guy who quotes from the Enquirer is trying for a discredit move? Bawhahahaha!”

“tu quoque


this doesnt make your source any more objective.

in fact, your last post is absolutely self-incriminating by the nature of your own criticism.
last edited: 10/04/06 2:43:51 PM”

“At least it wasn't the Daily Kos or Democratic Underground where Vile gets the bulk of his 'news'.
LOL”

“He hasn't quoted The Daily Show lately either.

*Mars Bar*”

“mjw...dude whats with the negative waves man....you should be righteous and positive...WOOF WOOF (Donald Sutherlan) sorta....

Poor mjw gotta hurt when you see a beloved Government system like a SKOOL so blatantly showing their control issues.”

“rev. wicked has a point. why do you cahnge the subject? do you agree the guy should have been arrested for making a commnet to Cheney? what sort of free society is this? is it free anymore>?”

“it hurts more when a beloved government system like the presidency does it to an obscene degree.

you probably should read what i say about things before making an ass out of yourself. again. (i.e. scroll up) you're a bizarre human being.
last edited: 10/04/06 3:15:04 PM”

“True but I wager we saw the beginning in your fabled 42nd administration.....

LOL... or could you read my post?”

“What's the betting this one is dropped by the Consevative group before ever getting to court.

I'm betting she was asked to stop reading her bible as she needed to get back to class, or was expected to be somewhere else, or was perhaps in a place she shouldn't have been.”

“True but I wager we saw the beginning in your fabled 42nd administration.....

LOL... or could you read my post

lol you're the densest troll ive ever encountered.”

“LOL
I bet the school fools quickly back down and issue an apology to try to escape damages.”

“http://www.pgcps.org/~ddems/ddemsadmin.htm
Principal Charoscar Coleman and Vice Principal Jeannette Rainey

Anyone want to place bets if they are liberal Democrats? LOL”

“number 1 on what list, GGGGS?”

“Once again mjw shows up at the ballpark with his bat ready to swing...and its hockey season.”

“you can read his posts? cool!”

“message from mjw666 being ignored
message from HikerBoy being ignored

[VBG]

Please do not pick on the cowardly trolls ;-)”

“o i c

if another poster comes up with an opposing view or a legitamate challenge to GGGS, he plugs his ears...."nee-yaa, can't hear you". better than answering hard questions, i guess.

cowardly trolll? i've been on this site 2 YEARS longer than you, sonny boy.”

“
"sonny boy"??

What a dork! LOL!


”

“Number 1 on what list Stove Stomper?”

“spending time with your family makes you a dork? arent you one of the family values guys?

have some ballz and post your pic, fullmoon. a backpakcing pic would be great but i bet youve never seen a trail”

“spending time with your family makes you a dork?

No, saying "sonny boy" makes you a dork.

Sorry you got so confused by the complicated post.

I've posted a backpacking picture of me on here before you homo.”

“Ah yes, that law that was signed by the president on 12/19/2000.

Anybody want to venture a guess who was president on 12/19/2000?”

“and your problem with this is.................

the little twerp "posted a picture of the president, scrawled "Kill Bush" across the top and drew a dagger stabbing his outstretched hand."

of course secret service is going to investigate. its their damn job

and then they questioned her for 15 minutes. big whoop. they probably even gave her a sucker when it was all over. its not like they went all jack bauer on her ass

c'mon, usa. i expect better from you”