I read that link, but on that page noticed and followed a link provocatively titled, "She said 'no' to Dick Cheney and now she may go to jail".http://www.altweeklies.com/gyrobase/AltWeeklies/At that site, there is a link to this article at the Eugene Weekly.http://www.eugeneweekly.com/2006/02/09/coverstory.htmlThe article describes a 55-year old woman facing jail-time for saying "no! no! no!" out loud in disagreement with what Dick Cheney was saying at a political rally on September 14, 2004. She was ejected for being "a protestor", and told to return to her car, a mile away in the rain, or be arrested. She replied, "I guess you'd better arrest me." They did.Her case was dismissed by the Eugene Municipal Court judge to heard the case. However, the city prosecutor appealed that ruling, and apparently wants to set a precedent / make a statement. She may yet face jail time for what she did, a result that seems ludicrously severe to me.This part, near the end of the article, sends a chill down my back.Read this, and tell me you seriously don't think democracy in this country has a cancer.Tell me you don't think we're on a slippery slide into fascism.Tell me you think you would send a woman to prison merely for saying "no!" to power at an event, be it public or private, and that this is a fine and patriotic act.Tell me this doesn't scare you.Tell me you think America behaves like this.Tell me you'd be fine with this provision of the so-called Patriot Act, that you trust it not to be abused by any administration, let alone this one."It's part of a long-term trend of hyper-management of political appearances by the president and vice president," Fidanque said. "I think it's an attempt by political handlers to make sure that the news is sanitized to reflect the message that they want to put out, which means that the public doesn't get exposed to controversy when controversy exists. But to the extent that the events are held in [private] places, they can probably get away with that."Regan is preoccupied with another threat to free speech: a proposed new provision of the PATRIOT Act, which Congress will consider for re-authorization on March 10. Section 602 would make protesting or holding a protest sign at any "national security event" a felony. If that provision were applied to Patterson, her "no" would become a federal crime, punishable by up to a year in prison.Section 602, as well as other restrictive aspects of the PATRIOT Act, echo Attorney General John Ashcroft's October 2001 warning: "To those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty, my message is this: Your tactics only aid terrorists."Tell me, and I don't believe you really read the bolded part above.--FY
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Ma