NationStates Jolt Archive

The offending slogan was, "Protect Our Civil Liberties". Irony is tangible.

http://www.bend.com/news/ar_view%5E3Far_id%5E3D18712.htm

That's what the Democrats are saying happened, but that's not what happened. Several people were being disruptive and heckling, and the women wearing those shirts were part of the group. Although I have seen people removed from places because of their t-shirts, this was not the case here.

Hmmm bend.com I haven’t been able to find it on cnn at all? Anyone else find a link?

Just was looking for something more … reputable

Frankly, I'm so sick of this need for people to "protest" everything it makes me sick. No one every has anything positive to support, just protest and hate the other guy...

Hmmm bend.com I haven’t been able to find it on cnn at all? Anyone else find a link?

Just was looking for something more … reputable

Still looking for a source that says what you want it to? Check maybe the local site for the news crews that were present to capture it.

Frankly, I'm so sick of this need for people to "protest" everything it makes me sick. No one every has anything positive to support, just protest and hate the other guy...

They ARE supporting something. Civil liberties. Like your right to wear a t-shirt that is non-offensive to a political rally, or your right to post what you think here. Do you believe that they don't have the right to wear those t-shirts to the rally? How was that in any way critical of George W.? It's like he's responding to an accusation that hasn't been made by immediately committing the crime referred to.

That's what the Democrats are saying happened, but that's not what happened. Several people were being disruptive and heckling, and the women wearing those shirts were part of the group. Although I have seen people removed from places because of their t-shirts, this was not the case here.

Well, the article doesn't mention anything like that. I'd guess that they'd report on any legitimate criminal charge that could be made. Heckling doesn't qualify. They were ticket holders.

Heckling can get you removed from a Presidential Speech, but I'm thinking something else caused the police to warn them with arrest. Noone was arrested.

Heckling can get you removed from a Presidential Speech, but I'm thinking something else caused the police to warn them with arrest. Noone was arrested.

I never said anyone was arrested, which is why I'm thinking they weren't doing anything they could arrest them for.

Still looking for a source that says what you want it to? Check maybe the local site for the news crews that were present to capture it.





Lol nice nonsensical comeback.
I was looking for something a little more known (someone like cnn has WAY more to loose if they report something that is completely unsupported) … so far bend.com is one of the few that has it at ALL … you figure something like this if true would be all over the place

CNN
BBC
NBC
ABC

ANYTHING lol

I cant find anything by any of them
I was wondering if it was just not me, but I see you like your source as in

So I will post this question to everyone else reading this … any of you find it either?

sheesh dont get all up in arms for someone that is just looking for more information then one un supported , unknown site

Lol nice nonsensical comeback.
I was looking for something a little more known (someone like cnn has WAY more to loose if they report something that is completely unsupported) … so far bend.com is one of the few that has it at ALL … you figure something like this if true would be all over the place

CNN
BBC
NBC
ABC

ANYTHING lol

I cant find anything by any of them
I was wondering if it was just not me, but I see you like your source as in

So I will post this question to everyone else reading this … any of you find it either?

sheesh dont get all up in arms for someone that is just looking for more information then one un supported , unknown site

I wasn't up in arms, I was being catty.
:rolleyes:

http://www.kgw.com/politics/stories/kgw_101504_news_bush_oregon.32d8b9e5.html

Here's a link from a reputable source. It's an NBC affiliate station, and you have to register to read it, but it'll give you a bit more peace of mind, I think.

A man alone at the event was also escorted out for his protest effort. He never uttered a word. But he wore a "W" sticker over his mouth and a T-shirt which read: “Stop Secret Arrests. Stop Torture.”

more sources include:

http://blog.seattletimes.nwsource.com/behindthecurtain/archives/005808.html

and

http://www.oregonlive.com/metro/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/news/1097928233288440.xml

i know this was on yahoo news but ill be damned if i can access the news page

That's what the Democrats are saying happened, but that's not what happened. Several people were being disruptive and heckling, and the women wearing those shirts were part of the group. Although I have seen people removed from places because of their t-shirts, this was not the case here.

Source, please?

Source, please?
you should recognize by now j0eg0d is a bit nutty and jsut makes up stuff as he goes, he doent have a source, or its highly doubtful that he does

Well at least I haven't been harassed/arrested/kicked out of anywhere for my shirt that portrays John Howard as the skull in a skull and crossbones... :D

Just about the only positive coming out of the election is that I get to wear that shirt for another 3 years!

I'm somewhat less than stunned to see that I can present reputable sources on demand, and when I do, the people who asked for them have nothing to say. :rolleyes:

They ARE supporting something. Civil liberties. Like your right to wear a t-shirt that is non-offensive to a political rally, or your right to post what you think here. Do you believe that they don't have the right to wear those t-shirts to the rally? How was that in any way critical of George W.? It's like he's responding to an accusation that hasn't been made by immediately committing the crime referred to.


Let me clarify. It would be nice to do something in a positive way. Heckling and shouting down another group's rally is not positive.

If this issue is so important, maybe these people should organize their own rally instead of trying to usurp someone else's.

And, BTW, from what I've heard, it's their actions, not the T-shirts that are the issue here... The T-shirts is just how a reporter identified some of the group.

Well if that's the case, you must have a source.

Frankly, I'm so sick of this need for people to "protest" everything it makes me sick. No one every has anything positive to support, just protest and hate the other guy...

Whine about it, that will help. :)

This is from their local paper:

http://www.kgw.com/election2002/stories/kgw_101504_news_bush_teacher_peaceful_protest.33035f77.html

Note the AP byline. Wonder why the "liberal" media hasn't picked it up? Also note, there was no heckling, no protesting at all, just a "nonpartison" (LOL) statement.

Frankly, I'm so sick of this need for people to "protest" everything it makes me sick. No one every has anything positive to support, just protest and hate the other guy...

Eh, so what are you going to do? Protest against it?

I think I'll go to the next Kerry rally within driving distance ( Florida maybe? ) and wear my "John Kerry SUCKS!" t-shirt, just to see if the Dems have any compunctions about tossing my ass out. :D

I think I'll go to the next Kerry rally within driving distance ( Florida maybe? ) and wear my "John Kerry SUCKS!" t-shirt, just to see if the Dems have any compunctions about tossing my ass out. :D
You specificy made fun of Kerry. The T-shirt in question didn't.
Thus your argumwent is a falacy.

I think I'll go to the next Kerry rally within driving distance ( Florida maybe? ) and wear my "John Kerry SUCKS!" t-shirt, just to see if the Dems have any compunctions about tossing my ass out. :D
i DARE you to explain how wearing a shirt that says "Protect our Civil Liberties" is disruptive to a Bush rally? unless of course Bush doesn't want to protect our civil liberties

i DARE you to explain how wearing a shirt that says "Protect our Civil Liberties" is disruptive to a Bush rally? unless of course Bush doesn't want to protect our civil liberties

Well we do know that he is willing to trade our liberties for oi... err... security.

i DARE you to explain how wearing a shirt that says "Protect our Civil Liberties" is disruptive to a Bush rally? unless of course Bush doesn't want to protect our civil liberties

Though I really dare anyone to tell how a t-shirt (as long as the wearers are quiet and respectfull of other peoples wishes in listening and observing the speach in a peacefull maner) disrupts a rally

Though I really dare anyone to tell how a t-shirt (as long as the wearers are quiet and respectfull of other peoples wishes in listening and observing the speach in a peacefull maner) disrupts a rally
i know eutrusca, he apparently thinks wearing a shirt is disruptive to the rally. but i would dare him to explain how a "protect our civil liberties" shirt is disruptive

Well, this is unsurprising.

The woman at the Laura Bush speech left of her own free will when asked and walked outside. A bunch of reporters ran up to her to ask her questions, and when she started to answer, that's when the police came up and arrested her. She repeatedly asked what she was being arrested for as she quietly allowed herself to be handcuffed and walked over to a police car, but no one answered.

I wore my
"Don't Replace An idiot With An Idiot" t-shirt
to a Kerry press conference
and the police forcibly removed my shirt.

I wore my
"Don't Replace An idiot With An Idiot" t-shirt
to a Kerry press conference
and the police forcibly removed my shirt.

Source it!

I wore my
"Don't Replace An idiot With An Idiot" t-shirt
to a Kerry press conference
and the police forcibly removed my shirt.

I'm sorry that happened. It's not something I can defend.

Now isn't that a different tone to take than, "they were fully justified in removing you for wearing a shirt with a disagreeing viewpoint"? And in all fairness, the teachers' t-shirts were making no criticism of Bush.

Source it!

Don't waste your breathe, he can't -_-

That's what the Democrats are saying happened, but that's not what happened. Several people were being disruptive and heckling,

People heckling?! At a political rally!! What's next, people booing at baseball games?

Free speech should mean that even the President has to put up with people who loudly disagree with him, but recently and Bush in particular take all sorts of liberties, 'cause who knows, those wacky civil liberty-wanting-people might be terrorists.

People heckling?! At a political rally!! What's next, people booing at baseball games?

Free speech should mean that even the President has to put up with people who loudly disagree with him, but recently and Bush in particular take all sorts of liberties, 'cause who knows, those wacky civil liberty-wanting-people might be terrorists.
A stadium can remove disruptive fans. A rally is meant for supports you're rallying, not an open forum.

A stadium can remove disruptive fans. A rally is meant for supports you're rallying, not an open forum.


As much as I value free speech … debates are the more open forum for discussion.


But on a side note ( but very similar to this case) when I was a SR in high school we had a local radio station broadcast from the school

While it is a cool idea and a lot of people had fun it was not a much advertised event.

When me and a few friends came to school in the morning we had no idea … but by lunch we were confronted by the principal to remove the t-shirts of opposing radio stations and or bands that did not fall in the stations normal range of music (shirts like
Korn or Metalica)

Now THAT I was pissed about
(like I said bit off) but a highschool is not the place for corporate sponsorship

The thirts were in no way degrading and in fact the same shirts we had wore on countless occasions … they were our normal gear.

Ridiculous

did you at least work at the radio station for them to make you take those shirts off?

or was it a school-wide policy?

How exactly was "Protect Our Civil Liberties" unsupportive of Bush? I'm playing devil's advocate here, but I'd like to hear a Bush supporter's answer to it. How was that statement inappropriate at a Bush rally?

How exactly was "Protect Our Civil Liberties" unsupportive of Bush? I'm playing devil's advocate here, but I'd like to hear a Bush supporter's answer to it. How was that statement inappropriate at a Bush rally?
It'd be like wearing a "Protect Life" shirt to an abortion rally, or "Reduce Gun Murders" at an NRA rally, or a "I think, therefore Islam" shirt at a Christian rally. If you use a seemingly innocuous phrase solely to piss someone off it ceases to be innocuous.

Don't waste your breathe, he can't -_-

Of course he can't! *LOL* It was a personal anecdote! :p

*offers Goed a really sweet deal on a slightly used sense of humour*

How exactly was "Protect Our Civil Liberties" unsupportive of Bush? I'm playing devil's advocate here, but I'd like to hear a Bush supporter's answer to it. How was that statement inappropriate at a Bush rally?


Well (not a bush supporter) but really if it is a slogan of an opposing party … then it is more the slogan then actual saying …

I mean like “Service with a smile” can be trademarked or any other phrase and be exclusive property of a corporation … really it becomes associated with the rest of the party that it is the slogan for (the same reason they can say that the slogan becomes associated with the corporation)

I personally don’t find it provocative unless specifically anti whatever but it is questionable at least

It'd be like wearing a "Protect Life" shirt to an abortion rally, or "Reduce Gun Murders" at an NRA rally, or a "I think, therefore Islam" shirt at a Christian rally. If you use a seemingly innocuous phrase solely to piss someone off it ceases to be innocuous.

So you're saying that their t-shirts are out of place at a Bush rally because Bush is against civil liberties, just as a "Protect Life" t-shirt at a pro-choice rally would be inappropriate and incendiary because abortionists are against life?

So you're saying that their t-shirts are out of place at a Bush rally because Bush is against civil liberties, just as a "Protect Life" t-shirt at a pro-choice rally would be inappropriate and incendiary because abortionists are against life?
Yes, because clearly abortionists are pro-death. If you wear a "protect" this shirt, it's saying do it, rather than thanks for having done it.

did you at least work at the radio station for them to make you take those shirts off?

or was it a school-wide policy?


No I was general student … they caught me on my way to class in the other end of the building from the radio station

So school wide for general students

Yes, because clearly abortionists are pro-death. If you wear a "protect" this shirt, it's saying do it, rather than thanks for having done it.

So you agree that by the same token, it was inappropriate to wear a "Protect Our Civil Liberties" t-shirt at a Bush rally because he's against civil liberties.

That's all I wanted to know.

So you agree that by the same token, it was inappropriate to wear a "Protect Our Civil Liberties" t-shirt at a Bush rally because he's against civil liberties.

That's all I wanted to know.

Your logic really is screwy. Its not the shirt or the person on their own. But when you combine that shirt with someone who is against Bush, then the person wearing the shirt is clearly saying (through his/her action of wearing said shirt) that he/she feels Bush is limiting civil liberties, which can be seen as heckling. It doesn't take a whole lot of common sense to figure that out.

Your logic really is screwy. Its not the shirt or the person on their own. But when you combine that shirt with someone who is against Bush, then the person wearing the shirt is clearly saying (through his/her action of wearing said shirt) that he/she feels Bush is limiting civil liberties, which can be seen as heckling. It doesn't take a whole lot of common sense to figure that out.

I'm trying to make sense of his logic, actually. He's saying that if you wear a "Protect Life" t-shirt to a pro-choice rally, then it's inappropriate because pro-choicers are against life. He's saying that if you wear a "Prevent Gun Murders" t-shirt to an NRA rally, then you are inappropriate because the NRA are gun nuts who don't believe that guns kill. If I follow correctly, then by his logic, a "Protect Our Civil Liberties" t-shirt is inappropriate at a Bush rally because Bush supporters are against civil liberties.

I thought it sounded screwy. I just wanted him to clarify this. He did.

Basically, he shot himself in the foot with his own argument.

No I was general student … they caught me on my way to class in the other end of the building from the radio station

So school wide for general students

well, that's certianly stupid.

it would make sense if you worked at the station though...

Well I like to think that I made the better argument. He simply made an argument that wasn't accurate and doesn't apply here. You do deserve credit for sinking that guys argument though, I'll give you that.;)

Your logic really is screwy. Its not the shirt or the person on their own. But when you combine that shirt with someone who is against Bush, then the person wearing the shirt is clearly saying (through his/her action of wearing said shirt) that he/she feels Bush is limiting civil liberties, which can be seen as heckling. It doesn't take a whole lot of common sense to figure that out.

I think that's making an assumption too, though. Assuming that someone wearing a t-shirt like that has to be making a comment on the rally or against Bush is jumping to conclusions. It wouldn't stand a chance legally. It was ostensibly directed at nobody and criticized nobody.

I think that's making an assumption too, though. Assuming that someone wearing a t-shirt like that has to be making a comment on the rally or against Bush is jumping to conclusions. It wouldn't stand a chance legally. It was ostensibly directed at nobody and criticized nobody.

So you're going to deny that the people wearing that shirt at that rally were against Bush? Was it not made pretty clear early on in this thread that they were in fact against Bush? I also didn't mention anything about the law, just common sense. Using common sense would make it pretty clear.

Since when is thinking something is wrong being against someone? You're getting dangerously close to advocating prosecution of though-crime, friend. She didn't say anything against Bush, even her t-shirt didn't say anything specifically against anyone. Maybe she was thinking it, but she never said it. That's not a crime, and it's not disrupting the rally.

Since when is thinking something is wrong being against someone? You're getting dangerously close to advocating prosecution of though-crime, friend. She didn't say anything against Bush, even her t-shirt didn't say anything specifically against anyone. Maybe she was thinking it, but she never said it. That's not a crime, and it's not disrupting the rally.

It was someone being removed from a rally and (if my sleep deprived brain is reading correctly uhhhh) detained for a short time. Its not like she was executed or sent to "reeducation". I don't think this is even worth 4 pages on NS. I honestly have a good counter-argument somewhere in my head..., but I am too damn tired for arguing when nobody will change their minds. I do offer this one crappy point though. Why do most schools not allow people to wear hats? Reason: disruptive. The same goes for wearing a shirt with a swastika. An extreme comparison, yes, but the opposing viewpoint is disruptive. You say the shirt didn't say anything specifically, so I'll repeat myself, use a little inferring. It is easy to see that the shirt displays a message like "Bush's Patriot Act harms civil liberties" since it is a well publicized argument used by those that oppose Bush.

Edit: I really don't feel like waiting around for an answer. Maybe I'll check back later.

So you agree that by the same token, it was inappropriate to wear a "Protect Our Civil Liberties" t-shirt at a Bush rally because he's against civil liberties.

That's all I wanted to know.
The pro-death was tongue-in-cheek. I'll attribute the error in communication to the lack of intonation text provides, and not willful ignorance. It's inappropriate to wear a "Protect Our Civil Liberties" shirt to a rally if you're wearing it because you think it's not being done.

I think that's making an assumption too, though. Assuming that someone wearing a t-shirt like that has to be making a comment on the rally or against Bush is jumping to conclusions. It wouldn't stand a chance legally. It was ostensibly directed at nobody and criticized nobody.
Doesn't have to stand anywhere. A rally is a private event, like a party. If you were entertaining guests and one showed up and pissed you off, would you want to have the right to force him to leave?