Extreme Politics - not for the fainthearted

[Russell Kanning]

http://codepinkalert.org/article.php?list=type&type=144
Troops home fast

[Dreepa]

It sure seems like burning a US flag will get people's attention.

Just don't burn it like this:


[attachment deleted by admin]

[Russell Kanning]

On the 4th of July some people are going to start hunger strikes over the Iraq war.......makes flag burning seem easy.

[Caleb]

From Kat's article:

Michael Higbie has been charged with threatening criminal mischief, breach of peace, desecration of property, intimidation and bigotry.

BREACH OF PEACE?

Can I charge the U.S. government with this?

Caleb

[tracysaboe]

Since when is Bigotry a crime? (Besides affirmative action laws and such I mean.)

Tracy

[Caleb]

Bigotry is a crime in conjunction with other crimes (Hate crimes.)  It can also be a crime merely to speak it.  (Hate speech).

As far as I can tell, it isn't a crime to merely think bigoted thoughts, though I'm sure when they invent a machine that can read your thoughts, they'll get right on that on.  You know, thoughtcrime is what leads to all other crimes.

Caleb

[Caleb]

This in today's USA Today:  http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2006-06-19-our-flag_x.htm


Congress nears choice: Protect freedom or stoke anger?
Posted 6/19/2006 8:47 PM ET    

In early June an allegedly drunken man in West Haven, Conn., yelled racial epithets and tore up an American flag while arguing with police and passersby. Earlier in the spring, instances of vandalism involving flags were reported in New Hampshire and New York.

Those three episodes of 2006 ? as compiled by the Citizens Flag Alliance, a group pushing for a constitutional amendment to protect the flag ? constitute the raging menace of flag desecration.

In fact, they show what a non-issue flag desecration is. Instances are rare and easily addressed by local laws. They hardly require the extraordinary act of amending the Constitution.

But in a Congress unwilling to address important matters ? its own ruinous spending and flagrant corruption to name just two ? symbolism is the politically convenient substitute for substance. The Senate will soon take up an amendment to stop flag burning, and the vote is expected to be razor close. The House of Representatives has passed it, meaning that it could soon be sent to state legislatures, where it would be ratified if three-quarters approve.

While it's tempting to dismiss this as trivial election-year posturing, the precedent is troubling. It would for the first time alter the cornerstone of American freedom, the Constitution's First Amendment.

That is not a small matter. The First Amendment is the reason Americans are free to say what they think. It is also the reason people here can worship as they wish, associate with whomever they please, and get news and information from a free and independent press. It gives citizens a right to have grievances redressed. To limit those rights ? especially for so trivial a reason ? is to say they are no longer sacrosanct.

They should be. They are what makes America unique.

If Congress banned something as pathetic as flag desecration to score political points, surely it would consider limiting other unpopular speech.

The amendment's wording virtually guarantees that outcome. Would it, for instance, cover depictions of flags as well as actual cloth banners? Would sitting on a flag patch sewn onto the back of a pair of jeans count?

And what about the issue of flying a flag upside down? This has already become the preferred form of protest for people pushing for everything from an immediate withdrawal from Iraq to better psychiatric care for veterans. These protesters often say that they respect the values the flag represents, but that they believe those values are being subverted by people in power. Does this country really want to criminalize such a nuanced form of political dissent?

These issues would be left to legislation drafted by future Congresses and interpreted by courts. All of that, in turn, would weaken individual rights that are at the Constitution's heart.

And for what gain? Proponents of an amendment say the flag is such an important symbol of American democracy that it deserves a special status. But the Connecticut flag burner was charged with seven offenses ranging from public consumption of alcohol to criminal mischief. Surely, that is sufficient.

In fact, what makes the flag so special is this: It stands for a nation that deems individual liberties so important, it tolerates unpopular minority opinion.

The main threat to the flag comes not from the occasional burning of Old Glory. It comes from those who would sacrifice the principles the flag represents.

[Russell Kanning]

http://www.cfa-inc.org/

[AlanM]

http://www.cfa-inc.org/

*yawns*

[NC2NH]

Good times:

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Tens of thousands of Iraqi police and soldiers searched cars and secured roads in Baghdad on Wednesday as Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki launched a major security crackdown aimed at ending the violence that has devastated the capital.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&u=/ap/20060614/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_060614120831

ahhh curfews .... checkpoints ..... life is good under Pax Americana

Pax Americana... I might use that. I like it, it has a sickly ironic ring to it.

More like Pox Americana

[FTL_Ian]

I think Tracy's multi-flag idea is a stroke of brilliance.  It may be the only way to get the sheeple to stop for a second and look at this issue somewhat critically.  Imagine their thought process:

"Yeah!  He's burning the UN flag!  But, now he's burning the US flag???  Why's that NH flag still flying?"

That's presuming you get somewhat fair coverage.

Whatever you end up doing, I totally support it.  I still think an Uncle Sam effigy would more effectively be an attack on the government, but nonetheless, I'd still stand by you if you choose to burn the US flag.   

[Caleb]

That's presuming you get somewhat fair coverage.

<whispered> "If you burn it, they will come" 

[FTL_Ian]

Caleb, I noticed your avatar.  Have you seen this:

http://www.sp-studio.de/

My SP avatar:

[tracysaboe]

I think Tracy's multi-flag idea is a stroke of brilliance.  It may be the only way to get the sheeple to stop for a second and look at this issue somewhat critically.  Imagine their thought process:

"Yeah!  He's burning the UN flag!  But, now he's burning the US flag???  Why's that NH flag still flying?"

That's presuming you get somewhat fair coverage.

Whatever you end up doing, I totally support it.  I still think an Uncle Sam effigy would more effectively be an attack on the government, but nonetheless, I'd still stand by you if you choose to burn the US flag.   

Thanks Ian.

TRacy

[Russell Kanning]

You can send uncle sam effigies in the mail and I will burn them in public.