But you are unable or unwilling to say in what way they differ? There is a law requiring that ‘reverence’ not be broken within this monument. Don’t like the law? Don’t enter the monument. It’s a sacred place. Want to provoke Police officers, break the law, resist arrest and insult the memory of the founding fathers? Do it ANYWHERE other than inside a sacred monument built to honour the memory of Thomas Jefferson. Isn’t that enough freedom for you?
[/quote]
LOL @ sacred
The Jefferson Memorial has NOTHING to do with religion. Thomas Jefferson is not a deity. Stop claiming everything in the name of god.
Dancing on the spot while tourists are walking around, talking and taking pictures is completely different than an observed moment of silence. You’re comparing a specific event where people are asked to standstill and not speak to a regular non-event day where people are allowed to move around and speak freely.
None of the dancers are disturbing the peace only the cops are who feel the need to abuse their power.
Only a Nazi would agree a few people dancing in front of a statue should be arrested.
[quote]byukid wrote:
I think Thomas Jefferson would have actually supported the dancing, illegal or not. After all, you know, he was kind of big on freedom. [/quote]
‘Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will WITHIN LIMITS drawn around us by the equal rights of others’ - Thomas Jefferson[/quote]
“I hold it that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms are in the physical.”
-TJ
Yes, physical violence began when the guys started acting like assholes, but they only started to act like that because a bunch of police officers felt like they needed to arrest a couple kissing, thus violating any rights a person might have. I mean, come on man, you can’t possibly say that makes any sense. But hey, if you feel that’s ok, good for you, I reckon you will live quite happilly when all hell breaks loose, and martial law and dictartoships once again become all the rage.[/quote]
You’ve missed the whole point. This video was an obvious set-up. The people went there to provoke this response with a camera ready and filming. This is a common tactic of left-wing wasters. This is part of what they do instead of working for a living.
‘Martial law’ and ‘dictatorships’ are currently ‘the rage’ everywhere in the world EXCEPT the US and Western democracies. In fact the US and Western democracies are once again fighting for their own existence against dictatorships. This is the real world. The US is not in danger of declaring martial law and instituting a dictatorship. There’s more chance of Ayman al-Zawahiri converting to Buddhism and eating his fucking sandals for dinner.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
This video was an obvious set-up. The people went there to provoke this response with a camera ready and filming. This is a common tactic of left-wing wasters. This is part of what they do instead of working for a living.
[/quote]
Left-wing? You’re an ass. I’m left wing (proudly) and I work for a living. ALL my left-wing friends work. You think no right-wingers would disagree with the cops’ actions?
Well, maybe you’re right. They’re all to busy taking the day off of work to attend a teabagger rally.
Well, it’s clear that those people were deliberately trying to incite a police response by dancing and making out in the memorial. The rules for entry clearly state that a certain level of decorum is required. Had they been dancing and kissing 50m out the door they wouldn’t have been bothered. Of course, they WANTED to be bothered - what with being antagonistic, passive-aggressive neo-hippie dirtbags. These types were out in full force during the G20 summit protests in Toronto, pushing and prodding police…trying to get them to overstep their bounds, all the while being filmed by friends on a mobile phone for all of youtube to see.
The police were right in cuffing them. That said, that one foot-to-back concrete slam seemed a bit excessive.
The Jefferson Memorial has NOTHING to do with religion. Thomas Jefferson is not a deity. Stop claiming everything in the name of god.
Dancing on the spot while tourists are walking around, talking and taking pictures is completely different than an observed moment of silence. You’re comparing a specific event where people are asked to standstill and not speak to a regular non-event day where people are allowed to move around and speak freely.
None of the dancers are disturbing the peace only the cops are who feel the need to abuse their power.
Only a Nazi would agree a few people dancing in front of a statue should be arrested.[/quote]
Sacred:
‘This term can also be used in a non-spiritual or semi-spiritual context (“sacred truths” in a constitution)’
Constitution? Thomas Jefferson? Connection here?
Of course I’m a Nazi. All conservatives are Nazis. In fact, everyone who believes that there should be a few sacred places that you aren’t allowed to disrupt has a toothbrush moustache, and a penchant for mass murder, vegetarian food, cocaine eye drops and Alsatian dogs.
[quote]PimpBot5000 wrote:
Well, it’s clear that those people were deliberately trying to incite a police response by dancing and making out in the memorial. The rules for entry clearly state that a certain level of decorum is required. Had they been dancing and kissing 50m out the door they wouldn’t have been bothered. Of course, they WANTED to be bothered - what with being antagonistic, passive-aggressive neo-hippie dirtbags. These types were out in full force during the G20 summit protests in Toronto, pushing and prodding police…trying to get them to overstep their bounds, all the while being filmed by friends on a mobile phone for all of youtube to see.
The police were right in cuffing them. That said, that one foot-to-back concrete slam seemed a bit excessive.[/quote]
I would consider the G20 summit protests an unfair comparison. People were smashing windows, vandalizing property and a a cop car was set ablaze.
Even if they were looking for a response why give them one? What about their actions warranted a response?
Would you have felt disturbed if you were at the memorial and saw people dancing around the statue?
‘Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will WITHIN LIMITS drawn around us by the equal rights of others’ - Thomas Jefferson[/quote]
“I hold it that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms are in the physical.”
-TJ[/quote]
‘All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful MUST BE REASONABLE’ - TJ
I would consider the G20 summit protests an unfair comparison. People were smashing windows, vandalizing property and a a cop car was set ablaze.
Even if they were looking for a response why give them one? What about their actions warranted a response?
Would you have felt disturbed if you were at the memorial and saw people dancing around the statue? [/quote]
I wasn’t comparing these guys to every G20 protester - especially not the “black bloc” types setting police cars ablaze. I was referring more to the passive-aggressive types who refused to move during crowd control procedures, ie: sitting on the sidewalk because it’s a “free country”, refusing to move when asked calmly by police, etc. All the while being filmed by friends so they can post on their blogs how their rights have been violated.
Their dancing and kissing wouldn’t have bothered me at all, but this is irrelevant. They’re entering a monument with a specific set of basic, easy to follow rules (ie: Don’t be disruptive and don’t act like a stupid dipshit) and they’re flagrantly breaking them in order to draw attention to themselves. If you want to dance and kiss, do it outside the monument. Easy.
(If they were carrying on as they were in a public park or other such area, and the police responded in the manner they did, I would be disgusted.)
Breaking the law and filming it too. Setting a precedent.
If they hadn’t got a response what do you think they would’ve done next? Nude Kumbayah singing? Protesting against some ridiculous shit inside the memorial? Defacing Jefferson’s statue? Flag burning? Don’t tell me they would’ve just walked away and not come back if they were ignored.
The Jefferson Memorial has NOTHING to do with religion. Thomas Jefferson is not a deity. Stop claiming everything in the name of god.
Dancing on the spot while tourists are walking around, talking and taking pictures is completely different than an observed moment of silence. You’re comparing a specific event where people are asked to standstill and not speak to a regular non-event day where people are allowed to move around and speak freely.
None of the dancers are disturbing the peace only the cops are who feel the need to abuse their power.
Only a Nazi would agree a few people dancing in front of a statue should be arrested.[/quote]
Sacred:
‘This term can also be used in a non-spiritual or semi-spiritual context (“sacred truths” in a constitution)’
Constitution? Thomas Jefferson? Connection here?
Of course I’m a Nazi. All conservatives are Nazis. In fact, everyone who believes that there should be a few sacred places that you aren’t allowed to disrupt has a toothbrush moustache, and a penchant for mass murder, vegetarian food, cocaine eye drops and Alsatian dogs.[/quote]
Bullshit. Referring to a place as sacred has a religious connotation.
These days the word sacred is just a buzzword religious people use to claim ownership of things they do not own.
Breaking the law and filming it too. Setting a precedent.
If they hadn’t got a response what do you think they would’ve done next? Nude Kumbayah singing? Protesting against some ridiculous shit inside the memorial? Defacing Jefferson’s statue? Flag burning? Don’t tell me they would’ve just walked away and not come back if they were ignored.[/quote]
LOL
so somehow dancing in front a statue will eventually lead to public nudity and flag burning?
If they had done something ACTUALLY illegal then sure arrest them.
On the fence on this. The police here were a bit reckless. Hell if it were someone that really didn’t want to get arrested, the cop would have gotten head butted. These people wanted to get arrested to protest getting arrested.
so somehow dancing in front a statue will eventually lead to public nudity and flag burning?
If they had done something ACTUALLY illegal then sure arrest them.[/quote]
Facetious and wrong. They broke the law. How? The US court of appeals explanation is seventeen pages long. Suffice it to say that the court interprets the law not you and it has done so. These officers are there to preserve an air of ‘reverence’. It’s their job. They were correctly found to be in the right by a three judge panel court of appeal.
so somehow dancing in front a statue will eventually lead to public nudity and flag burning?
If they had done something ACTUALLY illegal then sure arrest them.[/quote]
Facetious and wrong. They broke the law. How? The US court of appeals explanation is seventeen pages long. Suffice it to say that the court interprets the law not you and it has done so. These officers are there to preserve an air of ‘reverence’. It’s their job. They were correctly found to be in the right by a three judge panel court of appeal.
The Jefferson Memorial has NOTHING to do with religion. Thomas Jefferson is not a deity. Stop claiming everything in the name of god.
Dancing on the spot while tourists are walking around, talking and taking pictures is completely different than an observed moment of silence. You’re comparing a specific event where people are asked to standstill and not speak to a regular non-event day where people are allowed to move around and speak freely.
None of the dancers are disturbing the peace only the cops are who feel the need to abuse their power.
Only a Nazi would agree a few people dancing in front of a statue should be arrested.[/quote]
Sacred:
‘This term can also be used in a non-spiritual or semi-spiritual context (“sacred truths” in a constitution)’
Constitution? Thomas Jefferson? Connection here?
Of course I’m a Nazi. All conservatives are Nazis. In fact, everyone who believes that there should be a few sacred places that you aren’t allowed to disrupt has a toothbrush moustache, and a penchant for mass murder, vegetarian food, cocaine eye drops and Alsatian dogs.[/quote]
Bullshit. Referring to a place as sacred has a religious connotation.
These days the word sacred is just a buzzword religious people use to claim ownership of things they do not own.
[/quote]
Whatever you say fella. The dictionary is recording an incorrect usage of the word. I’m wrong too. And contrary to being a lifelong atheist, I’m actually devoutly religious and using a ‘buzzword’ because I want to claim ownership of the Jefferson memorial…from Australia.