• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should Orchestrated (fake) Protests Be Allowed To Hinder Free Speech?

Should protesters be allowed to curb free speech in this country?

  • Yes. Protests are protected by the Constitution.

    Votes: 20 55.6%
  • No. If protesters stop free speech, they should be removed by police.

    Votes: 14 38.9%
  • If fake protesters & their masters should be prosecuted.

    Votes: 6 16.7%

  • Total voters
    36
Recommendation for you Sam:

The good Rev does not debate, he just likes to see his ludicrous words in print.
He's just not worth trying to discuss anything with so I will just pay no attention to him from now on.
There are plenty of other members here that actually can debate intelligently.





This is yet another lie on your part. I have asked you to prove your lies. I have asked you if you held moveon.org to the same standard and all you have done is dodged weaved and attacked.


Why do you avoid actual discussion of your lies?
 
It is already illegal to disturb the peace. (do you actually read any posts before you spout off?



If they tried to drown out the free speech of others I would.
That's the difference here: We aren't afraid for you to hear the opposition. You guys are terrified that the obvious truth of what we are saying will get through, so you try to prevent anyhone from even hearing our words.
You ****ed the thread up by falsely accusing a group of being fake/orchestrated, so instead of a thread about should protesters be thrown in jail for disturbing the peace and shouting down people or should protesters be allowed to deliberately try to stop the speech of others. You made this a thread about whether or not the protesters are fake. So when you say this same standard should be applied to any group who shouts down people speaking or tries intimidation tactics, it sounds fake. Especially when it is followed with more accusations of the of the group being fake. So if anyone appears to be fake it is you.
 
Last edited:
This is yet another lie on your part. I have asked you to prove your lies. I have asked you if you held moveon.org to the same standard and all you have done is dodged weaved and attacked.


Why do you avoid actual discussion of your lies?

Sorry Rev....I just can't hear you anymore.:2wave:
 
Sorry Rev....I just can't hear you anymore.:2wave:




There is more evidence YOU are a plant and an obama apparachik than anything you claimed.


I asked you specific questions, and you ran with your tail between your legs.....


Let the record reflect that you could not sustain your lies.
 
You ****ed the thread up by falsely accusing a group of being fake/orchestrated, so instead of a thread about should protesters be thrown in jail for disturbing the peace and shouting down people or should protesters be allowed to deliberately try to stop the speech of others. You made this a thread about whether or not the protesters are fake. So when you say this same standard should be applied to any group who shouts down people speaking or tries intimidation tactics, it sounds fake. Especially when it is followed with more accusations of the of the group being fake.

No...I have repeatedly said this is a "What If" question. Your side has been the one attempting to derail this thread at every turn.
 
You ****ed the thread up by falsely accusing a group of being fake/orchestrated, so instead of a thread about should protesters be thrown in jail for disturbing the peace and shouting down people or should protesters be allowed to deliberately try to stop the speech of others. You made this a thread about whether or not the protesters are fake. So when you say this same standard should be applied to any group who shouts down people speaking or tries intimidation tactics, it sounds fake. Especially when it is followed with more accusations of the of the group being fake. So if anyone appears to be fake it is you.




He's been on his appointed rounds as a plant for the obama administration to smear American citizens. You can see how he can't even name the group behind the town hall protestors because his marching orders did not include this in its lies...


He is an Obama Apparachik who is simply doing his duty as a democrat plant to smear American citizens who are not for Obama's socialist agenda. ;)
 
So then you thought Gates was rightfully arrested? Good to know.


Also please talk about how you are for the arrest and imprisonment of anti-war protestors.




They did. They do. Why are you so quick to give these organizations a pass, yet you can't even NAME the imaginary organization that is controlling in your mind these protests at the town hall?

Hypocrite much?






Really?


ProtestWarrior.com - Crashing the Protests

ProtestWarrior.com - A.N.S.W.E.R. Infiltrated

especially this one:


ProtestWarrior.com - Eagle Strike


Lets see if you can be not hypocritical. :lol:




Note how this post was ignored. There is no doubt that Devil wants no part of an honest discussion here.
 
He's been on his appointed rounds as a plant for the obama administration to smear American citizens. You can see how he can't even name the group behind the town hall protestors because his marching orders did not include this in its lies...


He is an Obama Apparachik who is simply doing his duty as a democrat plant to smear American citizens who are not for Obama's socialist agenda. ;)

Well golly, these have already been posted. Ever thought of actually reading something? Yeah, I know that may be difficult

Still need more help good Reverend? How about this, for starters.

Rick Perry, bastion of succession from evil Federal Government, turns down $500 million grant...now gets on knees for $650 million load....from Federal Government (know the difference between a grant and a loan Reverend?)

Bobby Jindal, defender from stimulus monies....goes around state handing out big prop checks with his name on...guess where that money comes from.

Senator Kyl, freedom from stimulus right? Lahood and Salazar write to Governor, nope Governor begs for stimulus money

Rep. Kingston bashes stimulus, while putting on his own website taking credit for stimulus money.

It has all been in the news, and posted here with all the cute little linkies you needed. You ignored them. So since you are so in love with looking back at back posts, YOU can look for my links, then bow down after and I will forgive you. Or do you really want me to post them? Or should I let you try and slink out of this hole you are digging yourself in (you do realize I am trying to set you up right?).
 
Well golly, these have already been posted. Ever thought of actually reading something? Yeah, I know that may be difficult

Still need more help good Reverend? How about this, for starters.

Rick Perry, bastion of succession from evil Federal Government, turns down $500 million grant...now gets on knees for $650 million load....from Federal Government (know the difference between a grant and a loan Reverend?)

Bobby Jindal, defender from stimulus monies....goes around state handing out big prop checks with his name on...guess where that money comes from.

Senator Kyl, freedom from stimulus right? Lahood and Salazar write to Governor, nope Governor begs for stimulus money

Rep. Kingston bashes stimulus, while putting on his own website taking credit for stimulus money.

It has all been in the news, and posted here with all the cute little linkies you needed. You ignored them. So since you are so in love with looking back at back posts, YOU can look for my links, then bow down after and I will forgive you. Or do you really want me to post them? Or should I let you try and slink out of this hole you are digging yourself in (you do realize I am trying to set you up right?).





Uhm what are you on about now? You are losing all composure. You post information on three things you link to, but ignore the challenges presented to you in this thread....


I have no idea even what threads those are from, nor do I care. You attacked me chuckles, and have not commented intelligently or with facts in this thread.


Now is the time to stand up and deliver or go the way of irrellevancy.... :2wave:
 
No...I have repeatedly said this is a "What If" question. Your side has been the one attempting to derail this thread at every turn.


When you start off accusing or slandering a group as being fake in the OP you derailed your own thread from the start. It doesn't matter if you present it as a "what if", you are still claiming the group is fake with out any solid evidence to prove those groups are fake. The last 16 pages would have been about "yeah or no protesters should be allowed to shout down people speaking or use intimidation tactics to silence the speech of others" if you did not present this premise that the protesters were fake. Because with your accusation it looks like on the surface you want to ban people protesting "health care reform" and jail them for it.


"Since I & many others feel that the shouting protest at many health care rallies is being orchestrated, & appears designed to prevent the American voter from hearing the other side of the issue, I ask the above poll question.
Whether or not our suspicions (including those of press Sec Gibbs at today's briefing C-SPAN | Capitol Hill, The White House and National Politics) prove to be true, my poll question remains.

The last option should read: If fake, (operatives proven to be merely "Posing" as concerned citizens while actually being paid money for the purpose of inhibiting free speech) protesters & their masters should be prosecuted
."
 
Last edited:
He's been on his appointed rounds as a plant for the obama administration to smear American citizens. You can see how he can't even name the group behind the town hall protestors because his marching orders did not include this in its lies...


He is an Obama Apparachik who is simply doing his duty as a democrat plant to smear American citizens who are not for Obama's socialist agenda. ;)

I think he just wants his free health care and he is desperate to not lose it.
 
I have no idea even what threads those are from, nor do I care. You attacked me chuckles, and have not commented intelligently or with facts in this thread.

Bobby Jindal
Here we have good old Bobby thrashing the stimulus -
Yet on almost the same day we have little Bobby going to Anacoco, Louisiana to present a jumbo-sized check to residents of Vernon Parish
Here is a picture for you
jindaljumbostimuluscheck.jpg

And another
jindalchecksfinal.jpg

Egads, he printed his own name on the check...like he is taking credit for it.
Here he is accepting $10 million in education funds, Weatherization programs in Louisiana, and law enforcement training programs, infrastructure grants, to community service programs. All creating jobs in his home state.

Rick Perry​
Now remember, the good Rick Perry thinks Texas is so sufficiant, he should just uns-hed the shackles of Federal Government and run free from the stimulus. Well the stimulus offered him $555 million in a Federal grant. So now the groveling hypocrite has to ask for $650 million in a loan. So do you know the difference between a grant and a loan?

Texas asks for federal help after rejected stimulus money
"That $555 million would that would have come with the stimulus money wouldn't have to be paid back to the federal government and that would have saved business taxpayers money for the next 20 years," said Rep. Mark Strama, D-Austin.

Despite the loan, Gov. Perry defended his decision to those who questioned it.

"They are shortsighted and probably criticizing for a political reason rather than a legitimate financial reason," Gov. Perry said.
Financial reasons highlight the fact that this loan would be one of many.

"We are expecting to need to borrow about $650 million from the federal government through October 1st, to pay for unemployment benefits", Hatchitt said.

Really Rick? Just shortsighted political reason? Nothing to do with the fact your state now will have to pay back $650 million + interest where as you would have just received $555 million? Really Rick, can you be such a craven moronic hypocrite?

This is what his opponent next year, Kay Hutchinson, had to say: GOP12
“Governor Perry recklessly turned down the federal unemployment insurance money. He never even looked at cutting the ridiculous federal strings attached to that money like I would have done. He didn’t even attempt to negotiate a way to relieve employers from a tax increase while helping Texans affected by the economic downturn.”

What about Senator Kyl?​
The good Senator said the stimulus package “hasn’t helped yet", and "What I proposed is, after you complete the contracts that are already committed, the things that are in the pipeline, stop it."

So Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood writes to Arizona Republican Gov. Jan Brewer
The stimulus has been very effective in creating job opportunities throughout the country. However, if you prefer to forfeit the money we are making available to your state, as Senator Kyl suggests, please let me know.

To which the good Gov. responds:
“To forgo these funds at this time would be a disservice to Arizona taxpayers who have remitted their federal taxes in good faith and have seen many of those hard-earned dollars expended for the benefit of residents of other states,” the governor wrote. “Our citizens need their fair share of those funds returned home to provide for their families during these hours of our greatest need.“
Well ok, Kyl is not so much a hypocrite as he is a moron who obviously does not care about the best interests of his state. Gov. Brewer on the other hand seems to be living in reality at least.

But wait, is there more?

What about Rep. Kingston?
Yes the same Rep. Kingston who proudly is taking credit for stimulus money:

But wait, here he is slamming the same stimulus?
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqLvrB_t-40"]YouTube - Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA) slams stimulus while taking credit for it at home[/ame]
Mr. President, where’s the stimulus package? Where are the jobs? [...] Mr. Speaker, this is not the change the folks in Coffee County, Georgia, can use. They need jobs.
Where Rep. Kingston? I don't know, why not look on your own freaking webpage.

And good Reverend, good day :2wave:​
 
What does any of this have to do with this thread and your lack of fact posting on the topic?
 
I think he just wants his free health care and he is desperate to not lose it.

Can anyone name ANY Republican Congressman or Senator who rails against a government option but who has refused to take his/her government run, "Socialized Medicine?"

They have theirs but they just don't want us to get ours!
 
Moderator's Warning:
Going to say this once, to both sides.

This thread is not talking about any specific event. Its the only reason its here, rather than conspiracy theories. If the continued attempts to either steer it towards a singular event, by either side, then action will be taken with the poster, the thread, or both.
 
It would apply to anyone infringing on the First Amendment rights of others.
( the flagrancy & whether or not they are paid operatives would only come into account when a decision is being made for prosecution. Paid operatives should get the book thrown at them while legitimate protesters would probably not be prosecuted, just removed from the meeting).

Many ordinary folks have not the resources to organize public protests. More often than not they only way that they can be heard and let others know of their dissent is through town hall meetings. What you are wanting is not about infringing on others 1st amendment rights. What you are wanting is to silence people just because they disagree. You want a town hall meeting where no one is allowed to be vocal in their disagreement. People have a right to be aholes so long as it doesn't endanger the lives of anyone. And that includes shouting down others.



Last time I checked, the constitution doesn't protect anyone's right to deprive others of their First Amendment rights.

The first amendment applies to everyone equally. It does not address anything about how loud or quiet one has to be to exercise that right. It just states that you have a right to speak. It does not say anything about being heard. You need to learn to recognize the difference as you obviously have not understood it yet even though it has been told to you before in this thread.
 
Where does this happen? China or Canada? :lol:

Do a simple google search and you will find more information.

jamesrage said:
What evidence is there to support your claim that this happens and what actual evidence you have to support your claim that this happening with the protest that is the subject of the OP? If there videos of government agents paying people to do these things?

I'm not claiming it is common or widespread (though who knows), but it does happen. Same advice as above... do a simple search.
 
Moneys free speech, so if lobbyists can give money to legislators, I don't see why you couldn't pay protesters.

They do.......... bribes paid to politicians are simply called "Campaign Contributions", but they are just simple bribes & go to both sides of the aisle. (how much does a Senator cost these days??)
(Al Capone made many "Campaign Contributions" the pols in Chicago too)
 
Last edited:
Since I & many others feel that the shouting protest at many health care rallies is being orchestrated, & appears designed to prevent the American voter from hearing the other side of the issue, I ask the above poll question.
Whether or not our suspicions (including those of press Sec Gibbs at today's briefing C-SPAN | Capitol Hill, The White House and National Politics) prove to be true, my poll question remains.

The last option should read: If fake, (operatives proven to be merely "Posing" as concerned citizens while actually being paid money for the purpose of inhibiting free speech) protesters & their masters should be prosecuted.

The last option is the option of treason and tyranny. Protest can never be denied. If you're having a problem with rallies, hold them indoors or on private property where you can remove yourselves from the counter protest. But doing anything to end, disrupt, or make illegal the protest is a horrible act of aggression against freedom and liberty.
 
The last option is the option of treason and tyranny. Protest can never be denied. If you're having a problem with rallies, hold them indoors or on private property where you can remove yourselves from the counter protest. But doing anything to end, disrupt, or make illegal the protest is a horrible act of aggression against freedom and liberty.

While I disagree with your characterization that any such laws would necessarily be " the option of treason and tyranny".....I agree that any such law would have to be very carefully drafted & applied so as to not inhibit free speech.

The alternative to such new laws would be to do nothing, which would allow possibly disingenuous operatives, from either side, to stifle all our First Amendment rights through intimidation...... by not allowing free speech that they disagree with to be heard..
I believe carefully worded laws could protect all of our First Amendment rights while still allowing dissent, but am mindful of the dangers.
 
Last edited:
While I disagree with your characterization that any such laws would necessarily be " the option of treason and tyranny".....I agree that any such law would have to be very carefully drafted & applied so as to not inhibit free speech.

The alternative to such new laws would be to do nothing, which would allow possibly disingenuous operatives, from either side, to stifle all our First Amendment rights through intimidation...... by not allowing free speech that they disagree with to be heard..
I believe carefully worded laws could protect all of our First Amendment rights while still allowing dissent, but am mindful of the dangers.

In those town hall meetings show me an example of intimidation. Where were the speakers threatened.
 
While I disagree with your characterization that any such laws would necessarily be " the option of treason and tyranny".....I agree that any such law would have to be very carefully drafted & applied so as to not inhibit free speech.

The alternative to such new laws would be to do nothing, which would allow possibly disingenuous operatives, from either side, to stifle all our First Amendment rights through intimidation...... by not allowing free speech that they disagree with to be heard..
I believe carefully worded laws could protect all of our First Amendment rights while still allowing dissent, but am mindful of the dangers.

Hold the press release on private property somewhere where you can keep the counter-protest away. Any law which could then classify a protest or counter-protest as "orchestrated" and allowing them to be shut down is very very dangerous. I would rather deal with the repercussions and consequences of free speech, assembly, and protest than I would authorize the government to act against these things.
 
Back
Top Bottom