• 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

Devil505

Banned
Joined
Apr 13, 2009
Messages
3,512
Reaction score
315
Location
Masschusetts
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
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:
Ok, I understand the protest you mention are organized by a vast Top-Down Conspiracy just like the Tea Parties. Ri-i-i-ight they cannot be honestly be people who are upset about the Obama Care Plan. :mrgreen:

After all no one could oppose the Obama Care and actualy mean it Right? :confused:

Just how many Brooklyn Bridge Title Deeds do you own? :lol:

My view is it is a honest expression of outrage until it can be proved they are a rent a mob. And even if it is well organized it don't mean that is real outrage being expressed.

And where is the suppression of the free speech you mention?
From politicians and the bureaucrats who have a rather big soap box and with armed men who make sure they do have their venue ?

And why even suggest that people who speak up should be arrested? I thought that the 1st Amendment was for Unpopular Speech, not just popular speech and I thought we as a people do have the right to address our grievances to our elected Representatives. I guess i was wrong. People who speak out against the moral, wise, intelligent, and so benificiant all that is needed is there speech and any who oppose are dangerous and maybe should be gently reeducated or fast tracked to a euthanasia clinic if old enough.

The arrogance of this poll, the slant, the subject of it makes it a candidate for the Conspiracy Forum.
 
Last edited:
so like you the pres secratary is lying, to further idiotic conspiracy bunk....
 
This is either a basement thread or a conspiracy theory thread....
 
well how many protesters can you pay off to do so? not a significant amount i would imagine.
 
This is either a basement thread or a conspiracy theory thread....

This thread merely asks the question of whether or not such fake protests (from either side of the aisle) fall under Freedom of Speech protections or violate same, IF proven to be faked.
How is that NOT a legitimate & timely question?
 
Last edited:
you once again lied about the protests based on your lieberal talking points. this is a conspiracy thread.
 
you once again lied about the protests based on your lieberal talking points. this is a conspiracy thread.

You are 100% wrong. I made no claims of proof but merely asked a "What If?" question.
Is your side so scared of the truth that you can't even abide a legitimate question?

What are you so afraid of?

How about answering my question?
 
This thread merely asks the question of whether or not such fake protests (from either side of the aisle) fall under Freedom of Speech protections or violate same, IF proven to be faked.
How is that NOT a legitimate & timely question?


The issue is you are implying that the protests are some how false, fake, a fraud that they are not serious about the position they take, and that it would be a good thing if these people were arrested since they could not be real. If you want to go there how does one determine that the speech is fake? And you are targeting people who help organize protests as if real protests have no organization at all. I doubt that there has been any protests that were not a riot that had some organization and yes that includes trasportation of some of the protesters. Protest does require organization it is not spontaneous. You are just trying to work around the 1st Amendment. Your proposal mean Civil War.
 
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.

Loaded question.
 
The issue is you are implying that the protests are some how false, fake, a fraud that they are not serious about the position they take, and that it would be a good thing if these people were arrested since they could not be real. If you want to go there how does one determine that the speech is fake? And you are targeting people who help organize protests as if real protests have no organization at all. I doubt that there has been any protests that were not a riot that had some organization and yes that includes trasportation of some of the protesters. Protest does require organization it is not spontaneous. You are just trying to work around the 1st Amendment. Your proposal mean Civil War.

No...I'm simply asking a legitimate & timely question as to how far a citzen's first amendment rights extend. There are limits .....& should deliberately inhibiting the free speech of others, as a paid operative, be protected .....or is that a very un-democratic (small "D") act, dangerous to a democracy?
 
Before I vote, I would like to get some clarification:

Are you asking is it legal to protest a protest? -- In other words, be as loud and disruptive as possible at a public protest? Or crash a Townhall with the intent of doing the same?

It's a free country so everyone has the right to be an asshole if they so choose? Which is why disturbing the peace and public nuisance laws exist. Used properly, they allow police to arrest assholes set on disrupting and irritating others. They should just call those laws 'one count of asshole' or 'mouthing off to cop in the lamest degree'.

Generally, I think each side should be give a time and place to hold up their signs and get up on their soapbox. If one side decides to crash--disrupt and otherwise irritate and annoy a lawful protest, then call the cops and let them cool off in jail for a few hours. I've known a few people who were cured of their asshole tendencies with a few hours in jail.
 
Before I vote, I would like to get some clarification:

Are you asking is it legal to protest a protest? -- In other words, be as loud and disruptive as possible at a public protest? Or crash a Townhall with the intent of doing the same?

It's a free country so everyone has the right to be an asshole if they so choose? Which is why disturbing the peace and public nuisance laws exist. Used properly, they allow police to arrest assholes set on disrupting and irritating others. They should just call those laws 'one count of asshole' or 'mouthing off to cop in the lamest degree'.

Generally, I think each side should be give a time and place to hold up their signs and get up on their soapbox. If one side decides to crash--disrupt and otherwise irritate and annoy a lawful protest, then call the cops and let them cool off in jail for a few hours. I've known a few people who were cured of their asshole tendencies with a few hours in jail.

I agree with your thoughts. Protests should be legal UNLESS they cross the line & deliberately create a public nuisance for the very purpose of drowning out the free speech of those they oppose.
Then, the police should remove the protesters, even if their wearing Brooks Bros suits.;)
(my poll takes that one further step which is that I feel that if a protester is really a paid operative (from any side) creating a loud nuisance for the purpose of stopping free speech, he or she should be prosecuted along with the group/organization that hired him/her.)
 
Last edited:
I agree with your thoughts. Protests should be legal UNLESS they cross the line & deliberately create a public nuisance for the very purpose of drowning out the free speech of those they oppose.
Then, the police should remove the protesters.
(my poll takes that one further step which is that I feel that if a protester is really a paid operative (from any side) creating a loud nuisance for the purpose of stopping free speech, he or she should be prosecuted along with the group/organization that hired him/her.)

I agree--though that's a hard thing to prove.
 
I agree--though that's a hard thing to prove.

Agreed. Hard but not at all impossible. (you'd be amazed what the power of plea bargaining can result in)
 
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.

Prosecuted for what? Lying about your political opinion isn't illegal
 
Prosecuted for what? Lying about your political opinion isn't illegal

Maybe we need some new laws to protect our First Amendment rights.

Edit:

How about this proposed law:

If it can be proved that you crossed state lines for the purpose of inhibiting the First Amendment rights of others, & were paid for your efforts, you are guilty of violating 18USC231......(a federal felony) etc..etc...etc

Writing such a law would not be difficult. (Coming up with the political will & guts to do so....would.)
 
Last edited:
No...I'm simply asking a legitimate & timely question as to how far a citzen's first amendment rights extend. There are limits .....& should deliberately inhibiting the free speech of others, as a paid operative, be protected .....or is that a very un-democratic (small "D") act, dangerous to a democracy?


First, we are a Republic, democracy being the rule of the majority and thus antithetical to Freedom of Speech.

Second, I do not believe the poll or your post mentions that the fake protesters were paid and ignoring that your post is about free speech not disruptive activities. One cannot yell "fire" in a theater that has no fire. Throwing pies and worse at speakers at Forum is not free speech either. So far the only cases i heard is events sponsored by elected representives or government agency representives both which do not need protection for Unpopular Speech.

Third, if there are paid operative who disrupt people who are trying to get their point out that person can be arrested for Disorderly Conduct. And can be sued for their actions. I do not think that someone speaking out in a public forum violates the free speech of others.

Fourth, I do not believe we need to get into prosecuting people who engage in Unpopular Speech under the view that they are not being honest about it.
 
Funny, isn't it, that the left complains about the very tactics they themselves pioneered and excel at when others use it against them, even assuming that the protests against The Messiah's plan to destroy health care in America is "orchestrated".
 
The correct answer is that NO ONE should be allowed to disrupt a public gathering someone else has organized. Anyone who doesn't have the maturity to allow the speaker his time and wait to ask questions should rightfully be arrested for creating a public nuisance. No one has a right to use their "freedom" of speech to deny others theirs.

Doesn't matter if it's "organized protest" or "spontaneous outrage".

Period.

End of discussion.

However, Congressmen aren't people and therefore can be tarred and feathered at whim.
 
The correct answer is that NO ONE should be allowed to disrupt a public gathering someone else has organized. Anyone who doesn't have the maturity to allow the speaker his time and wait to ask questions should rightfully be arrested for creating a public nuisance. No one has a right to use their "freedom" of speech to deny others theirs.

Doesn't matter if it's "organized protest" or "spontaneous outrage".

Period.

End of discussion.

However, Congressmen aren't people and therefore can be tarred and feathered at whim.

I agree completely, but it appears that the police are not "Keeping The Peace" in many of these instances & I wonder why not??
(my ""organized protest" or "spontaneous outrage" only comes into play in terms of whether or not prosecution is warranted)
 
Last edited:
If the problem is with enforcement of current laws, what would additional legislation accomplish?
 
I agree completely, but it appears that the police are not "Keeping The Peace" in many of these instances & I wonder why not??

Because what goes around comes around, and the cops are going to get screwed over by Obama-care as much as anyone else.

What's fair is fair, if the left can't handle having their own tactics used against them, it's time they stopped using them.

HOWEVER, I'm also fully aware of the nature of the orchestrated town hall, with the Democrats planting professional public speakers with carefully crafted questions to create the appearance of a public meeting out of a sculpted propaganda effort, and stifling the opportunities of real citizens to ask questions and make their positions known to the man who is supposed to represent them but does not.

Anyone who watched the Christopher Shays "I'm Pretending To Be Uncertain About Impeaching Clinton But He Really Has His Dick Up My Butt" Town Hall Show back in 1998 can recognize the signs of False Town Hall Syndrome.
And the Democrats are urgent to spread FTHS this august.

They're also urgent to innoculate themselves against Crashing Messiah by establishing false premises to blame the expected failure of this health-care scam on ANYTHING besides the fact that their scam sucks and the vast majority of people do not want it.
 
Back
Top Bottom