Say goodbye to freedom of press....

Maddogg6

Whether your a 'wacko conspiracy theorist' - or even a staunch Bush supporter - if you value freedom more to the point - the 1st amendment, this should upset everyone from the US....

It seems unless your 'friendly' press - if you ask questions they don't like - instead of an answer - you can get arrested - FOR CRIMINAL TRESPASSING BY ORDER OF A PRESS SECRETARY - even with a press pass - makes no difference.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOerYpJse30

But strangely its not reported here???
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org

OldBuzzard

Oh puulllleeesssss...Infowars/Loose Change/Alex Jones kook 'reporter' gets asked to be somewhat civil, refuses, and get tossed out on his ass.

Sure he asked a question, but before he allowed time for an answer he asked three more. He's lucky that it wasn't me that he did that to, as I woulda kicked his ass. You want an answer from me, you damn well better be civil in asking it, and wait for my answer. That POS 'reporter' did neither and got what he deserved.

OH, and as for your precious 'Freedom of the Press'...read the constitution. The GOVERNMENT didn't have that clown arrested...the people that were running the event did, after receiving a complaint. It's no different than here. You have no 'freedom of speech' in this forum because it's privately owned and operated, and not operated by the US Government. You have the 'freedom' that the owner allows you. No more, no less.

Maddogg6

#1 the press secretary didnt try to answer his question.
'what are you making this up' was his first response - but when offered to see the video - he was arrested.

This 'kook' / 'clown' was invited like any other press - he was civil - tell me this - what does one do if they choose to ignore you?

How was he NOT civil? - imagine you asking about the killer of your child - how civil would you be if ignored when asking about it? Id say this guy held his composure pretty well considering the potential ramifications behind the question. (again this isn't about any 'conspiracy theory' - its about 1st amendment)

Even if you think this guy is a kook - he has rights like it or not - and to dismiss ANYONES rights - is kissing it goodbye for all of us.

I've read the constitution - and IT WAS LAW ENFORCEMENT who arrested this guy. A Gov't agency - on order of a presidential candidates press secretary.

Did he own the property? - NO it was press conference in a public auditorium.
What gives a press secretary the authority to have a registered journalist arrested at a press conference in a public auditorium?
What gives them the right to have his camera confiscated and destroyed?
wtf - is felony criminal trespassing?

Its a clear case of denial of the 1st amendment right guaranteed by the constitution. By the press secretary of a pres. candidate no less. The ones *supposedly* sworn to protect.

OldBuzzard

Thats pure bovine excrement. That 'journalist' went there for only one purpose and that was to bombard the his target with questions, and not give him the opportunity to reply. The fact that he got tossed out and arrested just made it all the better for his 'whacked out, sees a conspiricy around every corner, paranoid group'. Anyone with 1/2 a brain can go to their web site and in 30 seconds or less see that these people have no grip on reality.

If you think he was being civil, I would invite you to come to my neck of the woods and be 'civil' like that to some of the folks here. I'll guarantee that you won't get arrested, but you WILL get a good old fashioned country butt whuppin.

His 'press pass' gave him the right to be there and ask questions. It didn't give him the right to act like he did and cause a disturbance.

Maddogg6

Again with hes a whacko... you are too quick to dismiss THEIR rights as an american citizen...

1) Again - how did he create a disturbance - when his questions went ignored?
2) It was civil - and more to the direct point - HE WAS NOT TRESPASSING.
3) If he caused a 'disturbance' - charge him appropriately - why didn't they? They couldn't - thats why. So they made up a charge.

Thats 'whacko'!

calidan

Where was the video of this so called arrest? All it showed was the police escorting the guy out. That guy said they put him in the car but that doesn't mean you are arrested.

Maddogg6

The search shows plenty use of the term 'arrest'


http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/...g_reporter.htm


hes held until July 3 - thats not just an escort.

And notice how none of the main stream media is covering anything on it...

Yousaif

The reason that the "mainstream" media isn't covering it is because it isn't an issue. C'mon don't you think that CNN would be going nuts over this if it was true? Especially since it was at the republican debate?

FoxNews would go nuts about it if it was at the dem debate.

The fact is that the guys at infowars.com and prisonplanet.com and prisonplanet.tv are just a bunch of fringe whackos that. while some of what they say makes sense (in an offhand sort of way), they bury themselves in so many conspiracy theories and claims of the sky falling that no one takes them seriously at all.

Do I think that this country is teetering on the verge of being a police state? Yes

Do I think that our personal freedoms are being destroyed daily? Yes

Do I fight it at every chance I get? You bet!

But do I believe what these guys say? Not without outside substantiation. They are the "National Enquirer" of political conspirists.

Maddogg6

I see your point - but ... even if I am a raving lunatic - I still am protected by the first amendment - is he held waiting for a psych exam? - for trespassing? I doubt it. Not if hes out on bail.

Besides - there is PLENTY main stream media doesn't cover - so why *assume* all that caught on video along with several sites (I count more than 20+ domains covering it) posting confirmations - are all lying - and a 'false' report of charges countering - wouldn't that be illegal and enough reason to have those sites remove it - especially for a pres. candidate?

When...
Doesnt the accusation alone mean anything??... no - ok

So - why have him arrested edit: escorted away /edit for trespassing? - You are required to have a press pass to ask questions now? and if you dont ask a question they like - you are trespassing?? edit: escorted away /edit - thats bad enough in my book - no matter how you slice it - this story is evidence of our collective loss of 1st amendment protections.

Maddogg6

Maybe this guy better states my POV in better terms - hes a PHD...
http://ronpaulisright.blogspot.com/2...ube-video.html


edit:
Another 'fringe' site.. ??
http://www.tnrlive.com/index.php?page=news

Yousaif

The Tnrlive site is an Internet radio site called "Truthnet," which is run by Mike Chambers. Mike Chambers has always been part of the fringe of society, claiming that 9/11 was a massive government conspiracy, that no plane hit the Pentagon, that the government is trying to take over your life (he may be right on that one).

Ron Paul I can say that I support, he is for smaller government, lower taxes, etc. He is a true conservative. The problem is that the blog that you quoted has the disclaimer on it as follows:

Quote:

RON PAUL is RIGHT

So while Ron Paul may have a doctorate, the blogger does not, or at least doesn't claim to. In fact, the blogger won't even give his or her name.

So is it fringe? Yep.

Maddogg6

I took the disclaimer as one to protect Blogspot.com - who is NOT associated with ron paul - so - I believe its ron pauls blog. But - ok - I assume its not for the sake of argument.

argue his points made - it was an illegal arrest on command of a press secretary.

Doesn't really matter - the video is enough 'evidence' alone. Arrested or not. Source from a 'Fringe' site or not. All your arguments are moot.

edit: is there any evidence that its all a big hoax?

calidan

One of the problems I had with the video is that you didn't see everything. How do we know the guy did something outside the building? You only saw the guy being escorted out. After that you only have this guy's word that the person being arrested didn't do anything.

Maddogg6

Look for other vids - in different camera angles - I seen like 3 different ones on you tube.

Or ignore this thread and kiss more rights away... its your choice. One I wont force upon anyone.

calidan

Do any of the vids show anything outside of the building?

Maddogg6

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOkJ52eJ430

This does - and its still wrong. I dont care what you mental state is - he was civil - he was invited - but was arrested by order/request of unauthorized personell. (CNN hosted this conference and thus was up to them, not a press secretary or some advisor to a candidate)
Or please post how CNN wanted this guy arrested - or something stating he did something wrong.

AND he had a legit question - that still goes un-recognized.

calidan

He didn't want to answer the question. That is his right not to answer. It doesn't matter if it was legit or not. The reporter was wrong to keep badgering the dude. Just because a reporter asks a question that doesn't mean you have to answer.

Maddogg6

Did you ever NOT see a reporter badgering people for answers? Not when its a politician involved - but what about regular citizens and the Paparazzi??? Its ok to badger then - right?

Does it justify arrest for criminal trespassing?
Charge him for disturbing the piece, or for what ever... Its clear, a trespassing charge is all they can convince cops who are trying to do the right thing can hold him on - why? - he did nothing else wrong as they witnessed - otherwise they would have taken him sooner - but I bet those 2 cops were interested in hearing an answer as well. A cop is all but forced to side on the word of those they feel/perceive is in 'authority' - and let the courts settle it all out later. But, how many times could that be too late?

People are too quick to dismiss others rights in whatever justification.
To me, thats the perfect way you get people to demand their poison. capitalize on and exploit the 'justifications'.

I wonder what would have happened if they called Paul Revere a 'wacko'

'The british are coming!'
'Who cares - I got to work in the morning - STFU!'

OldBuzzard

You still don't understand. The First ammendment only applies to GOVERNMENT censorship. The GOVERNMENT did not have the idiot reporter removed/arrested. The Organizer of the event did, as was their right.

Maddogg6

Oh I understand perfectly. You like to give them excused to trample MY rights.

Is the police not a gov't agency ?! - and why wasn't a CNN rep there to explain why he was being arrested for trespassing?
If he was not invited - arrest him for falsifying his press pass.
Arrest him for 'disturbing the peace' if thats the case.

I see things like 'the CNN rep was trying to prevent him from being escorted' besides.... ???

Thats another right trampled then too - not allowed to face his accuser.

If I call the cops - and try to have some one arrested for trespassing - the cops will get both sides before doing anything. Period - that did not happen there. No the accusor stays in the shadows ?? wtf -
Go ahead and justify it... its wrong. But maybe you dont mind living with tyrants running the country - I don't.

'Thats him officer - arrest him for trespassing' - or are CNN people camera shy? - And why don't they report this story about a 'wacko' infiltrating a secure press conference. Why invite the media - and selectively allow the ones you want? - Its still called a 1st amendment violation.

edit:
why not just answer the question he asked by saying...
'Im not familiar with what you are talking about' I will get an answer for you as soon as I have some info.'

But it seems this 'cook' hit an exposed nerve? - So arrest him - is the best way to deal with it huh.... Zeig Heil mofo. I dont care who his friends are - you dont need to have a TV station to be considered a journalist. Or do YOU?

OldBuzzard

The police were there to enforce the law. Once the organizers recinded the reporter's 'pass', and asked him to leave, and he refused, (whilst probably proclaiming that his 'rights' were being violated), he was tresspassing. His 'press rights' were only what the organizers said they were. No more no less.

You obviously are refusing to see this for what it was. Instead, you want to see a 'conspiracy'.

How about I send a reporter to you at your place of work, and have him ask you on tape over and over and over, "Maddogg6, have you stopped beating your wife?", and before you can answer ask "Do you still molest little children?", and then without pause ask "Do you still have sex with goats?". I'll damn sure bet that you wouldn't be concerned about THAT reporter's 'Freedon of the Press', and you'd want him removed. Altho I took this to the extreme, that's just what happened in this case.

Now get over this, and move on to your next 'conspiricy'. This one is getting old.

Maddogg6

Why did those 2 cops sit there at first? They didnt see the need to arrest him until the third arrived. Why - because the 2 cops witnessed him being civil - otherwise they would not have waited.

And he DID give the guy time to respond - YOU are seeing what you want - I understand - its called 'denial' and its a very powerful thing - because its an ugly humiliation if its all true.

Thats what I said - selective press and is a violation of the 1st amendment.