 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Keith
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 130
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 12:50 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Navymomx2 wrote: | I thought I would pass this along. This is from an email I recieved from a Navymom group. This is her personal experience dealing with Anti-War Protesters. I am sorry, but they should never have been allowed so close to the cemetary. All I can say is this is the typical Anti-war protester style, I have seen it in my area many many times. Yes, they have the right to free speech to which I will defend, but that does not give them the right to treat people the way they did whther arriving at a cemetary or at any other location. I am just thankful that the ceremony that took place at our veterans cemetary was respected.
| Quote: | Just a short email to say, that this morning, both my sons wanted to
go with me to Golden Gate National Cemetary, for the service. I've
gone for the last 5 years and there has been a small crowd. This
morning, as we entered...we were greeted by a large crowd of anti-war
protesters......dressed in black and trying to stop entrance to the
cemetary...as soon as I saw them, I immediately got mad.....I rolled
down the window, and yelled at them "HOW DARE YOU!!!!" and they
flipped us off, and yelled that we were murderers.....The police were
there...and we got in safely...but by now, the adrenaline is
pumpin.....I want to mix it up with them.....they are by the fence
and yelling inside as people get out of the cars, parked along side
of Spainish american war veterans.....
God Bless America.....and God bless our Heros who died defending our
values...and for the right... for those peaceful anti-war activists,
to stand and yell at us...call us murdered and spit at us.....as they
protest the people coming to honor our military hero's...... |
|
OK folks... here's a chance to at least partially mend some fences on this board.... can we all agree this behavior was rude and an intrusion on the rights of individuals visiting lost loved ones to pay their respects. The folks visiting this cemetary were not rallying in support of the war, so there is not even a weak excuse for a counter-rally.
Public rallies for a cause that do not interfere with the rights of others is one thing, but there was no justification for what these creeps did. And for what? What did they accomplish? Did they change one single mind? Or did they just get to enjoy pissing on someone else's grave. (apologies for the language)
Do you agree?
Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Keith
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 130
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 1:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Scott wrote: | | Navy_Navy_Navy wrote: | Bet you didn't think it was so terrible when Clinton did it.  |
I didn't hear about Clinton doing it. I think it's a violation of the first amendment. If they're afraid that a protest will get out of control like the loonies that were trashing the streets during that World Trade Organization conference, then the Boston police should be paid overtime to deal with it. That's one of the reasons we have them, and it's one of the reasons they maintain horse-mounted officers. |
Just a reminder:
| Quote: | | Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. |
Of course.. doesn't say you necessarily have a right to have your free speech in the same exact location as another person is having his free speech  For example, if I obtain a permit to have a rally at a park, do you have a right to have a counter rally at the same park in the same location, or can the police provide you an equally public alternative location without violating your rights. The second option is done all the time.
I can go on a long time in debates about the First Amendment. There is so much written into such a short statement by people who couldn't possibly realize how important their words would be to help guarantee that we would be a free and vibrant Republic for over 200 years (or maybe they did, which is amazing). There has also been a great deal of interpretation to stretch the meaning of the words beyond things like "Congress shall make no law establishing a religion...." But that's a whole different can of worms.
Keith
Last edited by Keith on Wed Jun 02, 2004 1:32 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Navy_Navy_Navy
Admin
Joined: 07 May 2004
Posts: 5777
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 1:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Keith wrote: | | What did they accomplish? Did they change one single mind? |
I think it might have changed someone's mind.
It may have made someone decide that anyone who promotes slandering of soldiers is not fit to be CinC.
_________________
~ Echo Juliet ~
Altering course to starboard - On Fire, Keep Clear
Navy woman, Navy wife, Navy mother |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keith
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 130
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 1:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jeremy Eaton wrote: | Navy 3 .... well done!
At least we agree that MLK was a great man. I actually meant to type conscience.
I find it a bit ironic though... MLK was an activist, who believed in protests, who did civil disobedience, and was considered for most of his life to be an enemy of the state.
So now Bush who now comes to "honor" him holds the protestors at bay. That's why I find this ceremony to be rife with hypocrisy.
It makes me wonder why you think he's a great man. Seriously, let me know. Why do you think that? I know why I do, but I'm interested in why you do.
I see this "ceremony" as a sort of a political publicity stunt, with a cynical tacit wink to all those who continue MLK's work. The current administrations policies, I believe don't serve the interests of minorities or move toward a more tolerant society. If you think I'm wrong, then by all means, please explain why. Otherwise I hope you'll forgive me, if I doubt the sincerity of our president when I hear of his paying homage. I believe that he serves the interests of money, and not the people of the USA. |
Seems to me Democrats are very good at saying the right thing and putting on a great show, but who appointed the first woman to the Supreme Court? The first African American to the Supreme Court? The first Secretary of State and National Security Advisor? Where are all the minorities in the leadership of the Kerry campaign? Or do words matter more than actions? (one of the reasons I'm no longer a Democrat)
Telling folks that all of their problems are caused by someone else and telling them that, if elected, you'll take care of them is condescending and insulting. We do not need a "tolerant society". That indicates a belief that we need to "tolerate" those who are less than us. What we need is a society where is just doesn't matter what color your skin is, who you sleep with, who you vote for president, who you worship.... we are closer than we have ever been, but we will never get all the way home if we continue to highlight the differences instead of looking past them to embrace one another as brothers.
You believe Bush serves the interests of money and not the people of the USA, and you are entitled to your belief. However, it would be helpful to provide evidence of your assertion.
I could claim that Kerry serves the interest of power and money, then point out that he has been "very fortunate" to marry into wealth twice, that he serves as a senator without bothering to vote 85% of the time (including a missed vote that resulted in the extension of unemployment benefits to fail (granted, others could have changed their vote, but they didn't, and his vote would have caused the extension to pass had he decided to show up for work)).
What facts can you point to, not claims, documented facts, that Bush serves money?
Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Craig
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 1:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Scott wrote: | That's appalling. Right up there with McCain-Feingold's blackout on political speech.
Unfortunately, the Democrats seem to think it's a good idea too, and are allegedly proposing a "free-speech zone" for protesters at the Democratic convention in Boston this July:
www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0220-02.htm |
Yea - both parties been into such crap for years.
Actually a lot of the time it might be cop folks into "order" above the first amendment - but then one and the other party can sure give some of them amendments a beating. Do the Democrats want your guns and the Republicans would own your body? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Craig
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 1:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Keith wrote: |
| Quote: | | Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. |
Of course.. doesn't say you necessarily have a right to have your free speech in the same exact location as another person is having his free speech For example, if I obtain a permit to have a rally at a park, do you have a right to have a counter rally at the same park in the same location, or can the police provide you an equally public alternative location without violating your rights. The second option is done all the time.
Keith |
Yea - I've been to events where I'd liked to slap hecklers of either sides of issues.
The letter of The Constitution would protect freedom of speech from government suppression. Folks who would shout down to not allow another to be heard certainly do not respect the spirit of the law. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Craig
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Keith wrote: |
snip
I could claim that Kerry serves the interest of power and money, then point out that he has been "very fortunate" to marry into wealth twice, that he serves as a senator without bothering to vote 85% of the time (including a missed vote that resulted in the extension of unemployment benefits to fail (granted, others could have changed their vote, but they didn't, and his vote would have caused the extension to pass had he decided to show up for work)).
What facts can you point to, not claims, documented facts, that Bush serves money?
Keith |
What comes to mind again and again when I hear how often that Kerry did not vote is that some proggy showed a video of a congress person giving a speech about some bill or something or other. - The the camera panned the room to display that he was only one in it.
Someone once pointed out in relation to someones lack of vote that it was on issue that was well enough known that it was going to pass or fail regardless if some did not show up.
I'm not offering that so much defense of Kerry as that I think that bean counting of numbers is not worth a lot unless someone gives some presentation of what those numbers mean.
Myself would want to know more about the things not voted on and what he was doing at the time.
That crap about who he married is just low-life making cheap shots. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ASPB
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy
Joined: 01 Jun 2004
Posts: 1680
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Craig wrote: | | Keith wrote: |
| Quote: | | Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. |
Of course.. doesn't say you necessarily have a right to have your free speech in the same exact location as another person is having his free speech For example, if I obtain a permit to have a rally at a park, do you have a right to have a counter rally at the same park in the same location, or can the police provide you an equally public alternative location without violating your rights. The second option is done all the time.
Keith |
Yea - I've been to events where I'd liked to slap hecklers of either sides of issues.
The letter of The Constitution would protect freedom of speech from government suppression. Folks who would shout down to not allow another to be heard certainly do not respect the spirit of the law. |
Craig,
Can you understand that you're not welcome here and that you're disrupting what should be a place for studied debate. Your ad hominen attacks yield only disdain. You are welcome to your political views but could you find a way to participate in the discussions with with some modicum of basic human decency and respect for those that don't share your views.
If a vote were taken I believe you would be assigned to Saddam's rathole west of Tikrit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keith
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 130
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Craig wrote: | | Keith wrote: |
snip
I could claim that Kerry serves the interest of power and money, then point out that he has been "very fortunate" to marry into wealth twice, that he serves as a senator without bothering to vote 85% of the time (including a missed vote that resulted in the extension of unemployment benefits to fail (granted, others could have changed their vote, but they didn't, and his vote would have caused the extension to pass had he decided to show up for work)).
What facts can you point to, not claims, documented facts, that Bush serves money?
Keith |
What comes to mind again and again when I hear how often that Kerry did not vote is that some proggy showed a video of a congress person giving a speech about some bill or something or other. - The the camera panned the room to display that he was only one in it.
Someone once pointed out in relation to someones lack of vote that it was on issue that was well enough known that it was going to pass or fail regardless if some did not show up.
I'm not offering that so much defense of Kerry as that I think that bean counting of numbers is not worth a lot unless someone gives some presentation of what those numbers mean.
Myself would want to know more about the things not voted on and what he was doing at the time.
That crap about who he married is just low-life making cheap shots. |
Come on Craig, surely you can see I was making a point to counter Jeremy Eaton's assertion about Bush and not attacking Kerry for marrying into money.
Regarding the votes.. missing a few is one thing, I've been counting the votes on the official Congressional website since May 13, 2003 because someone told me Kerry hardly ever votes and I wanted to find out the truth for myself (kind of a quirk of mine). I keep all of the data in a spreadsheet and have pie charts (I know, get a life). Fact is, he has missed 84% of the votes in the last year. That goes beyond missing a few inconsequential votes.
That doesn't mean he never votes. For example, he did remember to vote in favor of protecting partial-birth abortion rights.
He did screw up and miss the unemployment extension vote.
If he were my senator, I'd want to know what the heck I'm paying him for... he never shows up to work. Actually, since this is a federal office, we are all paying his salary.
Wanna see some purty charts:
http://thinkinboutstuff.netfirms.com/senate_record.htm
Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keith
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 130
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ASPB wrote: | | Craig wrote: | | Keith wrote: |
| Quote: | | Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. |
Of course.. doesn't say you necessarily have a right to have your free speech in the same exact location as another person is having his free speech For example, if I obtain a permit to have a rally at a park, do you have a right to have a counter rally at the same park in the same location, or can the police provide you an equally public alternative location without violating your rights. The second option is done all the time.
Keith |
Yea - I've been to events where I'd liked to slap hecklers of either sides of issues.
The letter of The Constitution would protect freedom of speech from government suppression. Folks who would shout down to not allow another to be heard certainly do not respect the spirit of the law. |
Craig,
Can you understand that you're not welcome here and that you're disrupting what should be a place for studied debate. Your ad hominen attacks yield only disdain. You are welcome to your political views but could you find a way to participate in the discussions with with some modicum of basic human decency and respect for those that don't share your views.
If a vote were taken I believe you would be assigned to Saddam's rathole west of Tikrit. |
Dang, I hate to be in the position of defending Craig But his response here didn't seem disrespectful... others he's posted.. but not this one.
Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Craig
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ASPB wrote: |
snip
Craig,
Can you understand that you're not welcome here and that you're disrupting what should be a place for studied debate. Your ad hominen attacks yield only disdain. You are welcome to your political views but could you find a way to participate in the discussions with with some modicum of basic human decency and respect for those that don't share your views.
If a vote were taken I believe you would be assigned to Saddam's rathole west of Tikrit. |
Amusing. - That ad hominem thing you complain about.
I make a parody of what some of the folks you seem to greatly approve and you ***** at me for being something that you disapprove.
Decency to those who do not share some views? - I been watching a couple other folks who have been well inclined to present studied views. Not a lot of use. When same folks who ***** so passionately at me find their arguments not standing up so well they resort to the invective, ad hominem and spurious accusation at them as much.
Some people are not very bright though. I think that some have not even realized that they began the insult session that they whined about where it went later.
Welcome here? I responded to an open invite that was made on the net.
Some folks have gotten snotty at me and I love to play that way if that is the way folks wish.
Last edited by Craig on Wed Jun 02, 2004 3:26 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keith
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 130
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 3:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Craig wrote: |
Amusing. - That ad hominem thing you complain about.
I make a parody of what some of the folks you seem to greatly approve and you ***** at me for being something that you disapprove.
Decency to those who do not share some views? - I been watching a couple other folks who have been well inclined to present studied views. Not a lot of use. When same folks who ***** so passionately at me find their arguments not standing up so well they resort to the invective, ad hominem and spurious accusation at them as much.
Some people are not very bright though. I think that some have not even realized that they began the insult session that they whined about where it went later.
Welcome here? I responded to an open invite that was made on the net.
Some folks have gotten snotty at me and I love to play that way if that is the way folks wish. |
Craig.. please fix the quotes in your post... makes it look like I wrote the stuff about ad hominem.
Thanks... Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Craig
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 3:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Keith wrote: | | Craig wrote: |
Amusing. - That ad hominem thing you complain about.
I make a parody of what some of the folks you seem to greatly approve and you ***** at me for being something that you disapprove.
Decency to those who do not share some views? - I been watching a couple other folks who have been well inclined to present studied views. Not a lot of use. When same folks who ***** so passionately at me find their arguments not standing up so well they resort to the invective, ad hominem and spurious accusation at them as much.
Some people are not very bright though. I think that some have not even realized that they began the insult session that they whined about where it went later.
Welcome here? I responded to an open invite that was made on the net.
Some folks have gotten snotty at me and I love to play that way if that is the way folks wish. |
Craig.. please fix the quotes in your post... makes it look like I wrote the stuff about ad hominem.
Thanks... Keith |
Oops. Sorry about that. - I made such blunder a couple times I noticed. Wonder how many times I didn't notice.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keith
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 130
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 4:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Craig wrote: | | Keith wrote: | | Craig wrote: |
Amusing. - That ad hominem thing you complain about.
I make a parody of what some of the folks you seem to greatly approve and you ***** at me for being something that you disapprove.
Decency to those who do not share some views? - I been watching a couple other folks who have been well inclined to present studied views. Not a lot of use. When same folks who ***** so passionately at me find their arguments not standing up so well they resort to the invective, ad hominem and spurious accusation at them as much.
Some people are not very bright though. I think that some have not even realized that they began the insult session that they whined about where it went later.
Welcome here? I responded to an open invite that was made on the net.
Some folks have gotten snotty at me and I love to play that way if that is the way folks wish. |
Craig.. please fix the quotes in your post... makes it look like I wrote the stuff about ad hominem.
Thanks... Keith |
Oops. Sorry about that. - I made such blunder a couple times I noticed. Wonder how many times I didn't notice.
|
No sweat... thanks.. Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
