Protest Against Bush & Go To Jail.

Status
Not open for further replies.

JitsuGuy

Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2003
Messages
223
http://www.altpr.org/modules.php?op...le=article&sid=39&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

Protests, Even Buttons, Verboten in Crawford

by Matthew Rothschild, The Progressive
If you're ever thinking about going down to Crawford, Texas, to protest against Bush, beware.

The police do not take kindly to demonstrators there--or legal observers, for that matter.

And even if you're just wearing an anti-Bush button, you could get arrested.

That's the message a local jury sent last month.

On February 16, it convicted five peace activists of violating the parade and procession ordinance of Crawford, Texas. That ordinance required 15 days' notice and a $25 registration fee.

The Crawford Five were part of a larger group that was trying to go down to Bush's ranch outside of town to protest the Iraq War last May 3.

One irony is that they weren't intending to protest in Crawford itself, the protesters say. Nor did they do so, they insist.

As they tried to move through Crawford, the police set up a barricade and blocked them from proceeding.

"Our intention was not to be in the city limits of Crawford," says Amanda Jack, who lives in Austin and was acting as a legal observer on May 3. "We wanted to get as close as possible to the ranch," which is further down the road.

Jack was in the last car of the caravan, and she saw the other cars pulled over. Some of the occupants had gotten out with their signs to see what was going on, she says. But they were not demonstrating there.

Police Chief Donnie Tidmore ordered everyone to get back in their cars within three minutes or face arrest, Jack says. "I went back up to ask Chief Tidmore if people could have more time, and as I was doing this, deputies came up and started to arrest one of our members. Another legal observer was trying to find out the name of the person arrested when she, too, got arrested. I asked, where are you taking these people? And they arrested me."

Jack, the assistant director of Casa Marianella, a shelter for recently arrived immigrants and refugees, was held overnight in the Waco jail with the four others.

Their names are Ken Zarifis, Amara Maliszewski, Trish Major, and Michael Machicek.

Zarifis is an eighth-grade English teacher in Austin. He, too, was a legal observer on May 3. "My intention was just to keep an eye on what was going on, and if civil liberties were being violated, I would jot them down," he says.

But like Amanda Jack's, his watchfulness was not appreciated.

Zarifis saw the police arresting two people, including another legal observer, so he went up to the policeman.

"I asked the officer what his name and badge number was, and he told me, 'Step off the road, I'm going to arrest you.' I wasn't really in the road, but I stepped back four or five feet off the grass, and I said, 'I still need to ask why you're arresting them,' and he then arrested me and took me to the van."

Trish Major is the communications director at the Dallas Peace Center. She had come to Crawford with her fourteen-year-old daughter and her daughter's friend "to see the Peace House" there, she says. (A Dallas donor had recently bought the gathering place for activists, she explains.) She had gotten wind that the Austin caravan was coming, so she went looking for it. She saw the cars come and pull over and the people pile out with their signs. She heard Police Chief Donnie Tidmore tell people to get back in their cars, and she says he heard him warn, "If you leave your protest signs, you'll be cited for littering."

Major did not have a car nearby, so she picked up a sign and went off to the side of the road, she says.

"A television reporter came up to me and started asking me questions," she says. "I started answering her questions. In the middle of that, I saw five or six law enforcement officers coming toward me. And they said, 'Put down your sign,' and I was kind of wondering whether I should do this and would I be cited for littering. They put my hands behind my back and handcuffed me." It was the first time she had ever been arrested, she says.

When she finally reached her daughter by phone, says Major, her daughter asked: "Are your civil rights being abridged?"

Michael Machicek had a similar experience. He came on a bus with members of the Dallas Peace Center, and he had supper at the Crawford Peace House. Afterward, he saw the caravan come through, and he was curious.

"I wanted to see what was going on," he says, "so I took off walking toward the highway. I was standing by the side of the road when I was hailed by a policeman, who turned out to be Police Chief Tidmore. He said, 'You, get over there with the rest of them, get in your car, and get out of here.' I wasn't with the rest of them, and I didn't have a car. I wasn't able to do what he ordered, and I needed to explain to him what my situation was. I told him I walked from the Crawford Peace House, and I asked him if he could give me a ride back. He said, 'We'll give you a ride. We'll give you a ride to the jail.' "

Machicek says a deputy then came over, "threw me on the hood of the car, handcuffed me, and marched me to the van."

At trial, the police testified that the protesters in Crawford were yelling "anti-Bush, anti-war slogans," though the defendants deny this and a tape of the arrests backs them up, they say.

Their lawyer, Jim Harrington, director of the Texas Civil Rights Project, cross-examined Police Chief Tidmore and extracted an alarming--and telling--concession from him.

Harrington asked him "whether one of the defendants would have violated the ordinance by sporting political buttons, such as those that read 'No Nukes' and 'Peace,' without the permit," according to the Waco Tribune-Herald.

"It could be a sign of demonstration," Chief Tidmore responded, according to the paper.

Still, it took a Crawford jury only ninety minutes to convict all five defendants, who were fined between $200 and $500 each.

The Crawford Five are appealing.

Chief Tidmore says he cannot comment either on the activists' claims that they were not protesting or on his own testimony that wearing a political button could be verboten in Crawford.

"They've appealed," he says. "We're just having to wait until we're through the final phase of it" before talking to the press.

A separate legal action against Crawford is also under way. Other protesters from that day are pressing a civil suit in federal court against the town for violating their rights.

The ordinance, which has since been changed to mandate a seven-day notice, is "unconstitutional, overly broad, and gives too much discretion to the police chief," says Harrington, who is the lawyer in that case, as well. In a press release, he called the ordinance a "blatant political attempt to prevent any adverse political protest near President Bush's ranch. The Crawford ordinance illegally chills fully protected expression of political views. . . . In effect, it means that there can never be political protest near the Bush ranch or in Crawford, when he is in town. This is un-American."

"The Bill of Rights doesn't hold up in the President's hometown," says Ken Zarifis.

Adds Amanda Jake: "I think it's pretty ridiculous this President has a no protest zone around him the whole time."

Trish Major says we should all be alarmed by this. "The erosion of your civil rights is like a cancer that starts in these little places," says Major. "You've got to pay attention to them."
 
If you're ever thinking about going down to Crawford, Texas, to protest against Bush, beware.

Guess they should have gave 15 days notice and bought a permit.

Jury of their peers thought they should have anyways.... :rolleyes:
 
More leftist drivel.

I know, let's go enmasse to the President's ranch and protest. During the WOT when security is at its peak right after the Invasion of Iraq.

Be careful what you ask for, you just may get it.
 
by Matthew Rothschild, The Progressive

The Progressive, OK then, at least the article is a completely objective report from a fair and unbiased source. :rolleyes:

The Progressive: the last publication outside of Pyongyang North Korea that still uses breathless rhetoric like "capitalist imperialists" "oppressed workers" "building socialism" etc.
 
"progressive"

Here in "progressive" San Francisco "peace" activest beat up low wage workers in Starbucks and do there best to destroy their workplace. They block mass transport,forcing an overtaxed work force into their cars all to protest the use of oil.
Progressives send thousands of black and latino young men to prison for trying to enjoy the constitutional right to RKBA.
Progressives say that the 2nd amendment is for the National Guard,ok then fine if they want it that way then the 1st Amendment right to assembly can be best handled by...you guessed it...the assembly.
They want to detroy America and the B.O.R.

They are so friggin stupid,they are scared of the "right wing" that they do there best to insure only the "right wing" have guns.

I am glad the cops arrested them,they should have kicked some buttocks while they were at it
 
Thanks JG....

For pointing out the lawlessness of the left.

They obviously don't think the laws pertain to them
 
The entire idea of "free speech zones" is a bad joke. This current trend of jailing people based on which type of sign they're waving cannot be allowed to continue.

Actual *misconduct* such as in the Starbucks cases is another matter. But that's pretty damned rare compared to the "wrong sign" cases.
 
I guess loss of civil liberties is okay as long as it's happening to the left...? As for attacking the source of the article... That's fine, but it doesn't dismiss the fact that these kinds of things are happening more and more.

J
 
More Liberal Nonsense

THe heading should say, break the law and go to jail. Those protestors broke the law and they were punished. What is the problem.
 
Yep, they broke the law. Case closed.

However it could have been handled better. Y'all gotta remember that Crawford was a town with a population of about a 1000 people that no one had ever heard of until Bush bought his place out there.

They used to have one police officer and he was the stereo-typical small town guy that couldn't hack a police force that paid better. Now Crawford is having to deal with large scale protests, international recognition, tourista visiting by the hundereds, and the press is there constantly and in large quantities. To say they are both overwhelmed and dumbfounded is an understatement. They are still playing catch up. They do not have the budget and resources to do everything that needs to be done to handle the attention they now receive.

As an intersting note....

Bush was scheduled to make a speech in the Crawford gym awhile back. THere were people by the tens of thousands in and around Crawford. An enterprising local rancher set up a table by the side of the road and was selling "ROcks from Bushes Ranch" out of the back of his pickup. $7.50 apiece. HE sold out very soon. Authenticity was questionable. ;)

Smoke - just down the road from Crawford.
 
What Jim March said.

pax

"My country, right or wrong," is a thing that no patriot would think of saying except in a desperate case. It is like saying, "My mother, drunk or sober." -- G. K. Chesterton
 
Is ti part of a VRWC when a Dem mayor does it too?

Last years Chicago's own Mayor Daley, hero of the left and gun grabbers everywhere, did exactly the same thing, arresting over 1000 protestors that blocked Lake Shore Drive and did not have the required permits.

I didn't see any angry threads here or on DU or MoveOn or columns filled with rage and stilted, poorly written prose in the Progressive, the NY Times or anywhere else about civil rights, first amendment issues etc.

So I guess it's OK when a left wing mayor does it in a Demcratic controlled state but not when the "Imperialist Warmonger" and fount of all evil Bush is involved. Interesting set of ground rules.

So according to those rules if it happens in Texas it's a police state. If it happens in Illinois it's just a mayor protecting his poorest citizens.

I ain't real happy with everything Bush has been doing. But the left seems to be "crying wolf" about how "the sky is falling" because Bush is in the White House, or that Karl Rove is the anti-christ, so often and so loudly every week I wonder when regular folks are going to just start to tune out the rhetoric on how evil GWB and the Republicans are.
 
Some of the occupants had gotten out with their signs to see what was going on, she says. But they were not demonstrating there.
Yeah right. That rank right up there with "Iwas holding it for a friend.The whole thing is completely full of holes. The story would be believeable if not for the fact that it is so unbelieveable
 
Okay, I guess, to say "so what?" when the arrestees are people you perceive to be your political enemies. Remember these incidents, though, when somebody from the other side of the aisle is back in power, which will happen at some point. The precedents are being set now. Will you have a "so what?" or "they deserved it!" attitude when the arestees are people from your side?
 
Interesting that the author worked "verboten" into the article. What do you suppose the point of that was? Oh yeahhhh, Bush = Hitler:scrutiny:
 
Hey, look. I doubt any of us really care about the political viewpoints of peaceful protestors. Trouble is, we have no idea about the peacefulness.

Those involved with Presidential security haven't forgotten Hinckley and Reagan, or "Squeaky" Fromme and Ford. Smoke's comments about the makeup of the Crawford PD oughta be noted and thought about. When you're trying to maintain some sort of community peace, and protect a President who's a serious two-legged target for nutzoids as well as real enemies, you have some serious problems.

I'm not saying I like all this stuff, but JFK came all apart 40 years ago last November. We don't need another such event.

Art
 
I find it most ironic that a bunch of zealous 2nd Amendment advocates on this board are so willing to ignore/defend the raping of the 1st. :scrutiny:

There's little reason NOT to believe the story as it was told. Remember, this allegedly happened in a state that's still stinging from the whoopin' it got over another bad police force's actions in Tulia, Texas...not to mention the fact that I'm familiar with the attitudes of the police forces in the area where this happened, living only 30 miles from Crawford and visiting the Crawford area regularly....not warm and fuzzy about "peoples' rights."

hm
"All rights for All people All the time"
 
2nd&1st=endangered?

I voted for Bush last election. That said, when an American citizen is arrested for disagreeing with the sitting President, we are headed in a very scary direction.
 
"Zealots" huh?

Nice juxtaposition of that concept for RKBA people.

Speaking as one 2nd amendment "zealot" to others, the reason to "question" the slant of the story is The Progressive isn't terribly well known for its editorial balance. Maybe there is a column I missed on "Bill CLinton, bad for the country", but I doubt it.

No one is saying not to believe it but we are all saying to consider the source and it's credibility.

Lately THR has become infested with posters that cut and paste one left wing column after another with no personal POV (or gun related postings either) added. I think thye feel it is an effective way to sow discord among what they perceive to be right wing stalwarts, you know, us gun nuts.

There are plenty of liberal folks here that have a valid point of view on issues beyond the 2nd amendment. But typically we all try to play nice, have a repesctful way of arguing our points Our common ground, left, right and MoR, is that the RKBA is under assault and we mean to keep it for our children and theirs. Every poster here believes in the entire BoR.

I don't think anyone is expected to think in lockstep here either, unlike other forums like DU where you can be tombstoned for even suggesting there is another POV, other than the party line.

My posting on the same thing happening in Democrat controlled Chicago was meant to point out that protest has been a lot more controlled since the heyday of the '60's thanks to a series of assasinations and attempts on world leaders lives.

I'm not real nuts about "free speech zones" but the first one I was aware of was here in Chicago, by Mayor Daley, to keep protestors away from the Democratic Convention that nominated Al Gore. It wasn't invented by the Republicans or Bush as far as I can tell.
 
If only the media treated the @nd with the respect

it does the 1st.

"I find it most ironic that a bunch of zealous 2nd Amendment advocates on this board are so willing to ignore/defend the raping of the 1st."

Couple of things here that are wrong.
The use of the word " zealous" implies a meaning that is offenssive. The members of this board are siply a group of People who believe that all of the Amendment couple, not just the ones that liberals like.

Second, the 1st does not give you right to break the law. Those people were free to make their "speech", they just weren't allowed to break the law to make it where they wanted. I would like to see you make the same arguement that CCW, or even firearms ownership should be allowed in places that it is not now. When you start sticking up for the ownership of firearms in those places then you'll have a right to complain about what happened in Texas.
 
When you start sticking up for the ownership of firearms in those places then you'll have a right to complain about what happened in Texas.

OK kbsrn, you got it! I DO, in fact, stick up for firearms ownership in places it's not currently allowed. Compared to most on this board (and probably yourself), I'm a wacko liberal...but rest assured there is no right I defend any more or less than the others (making me a pretty lousy Liberal to many of my acquaintances). In other words, I'm one of the "zealots" of which I spoke. Sorry about the negative connotation, but I feel it fits the degree to which we all must remain vigilant in defense of all our rights.

As for the second half of your arguement, you got things backwards. The Bill of Rights does not yield to other laws, rather all other laws must yield to the Bill of Rights. In this case, the law(s) broken may very well be (and I tend to think probably are) unconstitutional. This kind of mindless law-making/interpretation traditionally forms a ring around high officials such as the President wherever they go. Common-sense safety is one thing...the revocation of key rights based on the proximity of an uncomfortable elected official is quite another.

hm
"All rights for All people All the time"
 
At trial, the police testified that the protesters in Crawford were yelling "anti-Bush, anti-war slogans," though the defendants deny this and a tape of the arrests backs them up, they say.

Might be interesting to view that tape. As it is, no one of us here on THR was there at the incident, or at trial. We don't really know what happened.

The Crawford Five are appealing.

It will be appealed from the muncipal court to county court, and then possibly to the appellate court.
 
Jack was in the last car of the caravan, and she saw the other cars pulled over. Some of the occupants had gotten out with their signs to see what was going on, she says. But they were not demonstrating there.
Why would they get out of their cars with their signs if they weren't gonna use them
Police Chief Donnie Tidmore ordered everyone to get back in their cars within three minutes or face arrest, Jack says. "I went back up to ask Chief Tidmore if people could have more time, and as I was doing this, deputies came up and started to arrest one of our members. Another legal observer was trying to find out the name of the person arrested when she, too, got arrested. I asked, where are you taking these people? And they arrested me."
If the poice pulled them over why were they trying to force the protesters backinto their cars to leave. Why would it take more than 3 minutes to get 5 prople back into their cars
Zarifis is an eighth-grade English teacher in Austin. He, too, was a legal observer on May 3. "My intention was just to keep an eye on what was going on, and if civil liberties were being violated, I would jot them down," he says.
Pretty much standard for a PROTEST MARCH
'Put down your sign,' and I was kind of wondering whether I should do this and would I be cited for littering. They put my hands behind my back and handcuffed me." It was the first time she had ever been arrested, she says.
Typical smartass behavior Which nobody has time for during crowd control
"I wanted to see what was going on," he says, "so I took off walking toward the highway. I was standing by the side of the road when I was hailed by a policeman, who turned out to be Police Chief Tidmore. He said, 'You, get over there with the rest of them, get in your car, and get out of here.' I wasn't with the rest of them, and I didn't have a car. I wasn't able to do what he ordered, and I needed to explain to him what my situation was. I told him I walked from the Crawford Peace House, and I asked him if he could give me a ride back. He said, 'We'll give you a ride. We'll give you a ride to the jail.' "
More smasrtass behavior. If he walked there why couldn't he walk back
Harrington asked him "whether one of the defendants would have violated the ordinance by sporting political buttons, such as those that read 'No Nukes' and 'Peace,' without the permit," according to the Waco Tribune-Herald.
Yeah as it would identify you as part of the group
Still, it took a Crawford jury only ninety minutes to convict all five defendants, who were fined between $200 and $500 each.
Bottom Line.
It looks to me like this group was pulling a publicity stunt. Just like the Kerrys of the world did in the 60's
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top