low_delta: (pissed)
low_delta ([personal profile] low_delta) wrote2004-01-07 10:46 pm

protesters = terrorists ?

article by James Boward at SFGate.com

Can anyone provide any sort of rationale at all for removing protesters from the general vicinity of the president?


Here are some quotes from the article that I thought were especially interesting:

Local police, acting under Secret Service orders, established a "free-speech zone" half a mile from where Bush would speak.

On May 30, 2002, Ashcroft effectively abolished restrictions on FBI surveillance of Americans' everyday lives first imposed in 1976. One FBI internal newsletter encouraged FBI agents to conduct more interviews with antiwar activists "for plenty of reasons, chief of which it will enhance the paranoia endemic in such circles and will further service to get the point across that there is an FBI agent behind every mailbox."

The FBI took a shotgun approach toward protesters partly because of the FBI's "belief that dissident speech and association should be prevented because they were incipient steps toward the possible ultimate commission of act which might be criminal," according to a Senate report.

On Nov. 23 news broke that the FBI is actively conducting surveillance of antiwar demonstrators, supposedly to "blunt potential violence by extremist elements," according to a Reuters interview with a federal law enforcement official.

Given the FBI's expansive definition of "potential violence" in the past, this is a net that could catch almost any group or individual who falls into official disfavor.


And finally...

But the Justice Department -- in the person of U.S. Attorney Strom Thurmond Jr. -- quickly jumped in, charging Bursey with violating a rarely enforced federal law regarding "entering a restricted area around the president of the United States."


I would guess that that charge is a felony offense, removing the offending liberal from the voter rolls.
dwivian: (Default)

[personal profile] dwivian 2004-01-08 11:49 am (UTC)(link)
I do have that info -- I read the court case, and the news from regional sources.

The area the president was passing through was reserved to those backers, and they had to have 'tickets' to get into the area. This is a common action, even in public areas, but Bursey didn't want to get a ticket - he just wanted to protest. This is no different than restricting access to areas of the Mall during Inaugurations to valid credentialed people.

TFR=Temporary Flight Restriction
TGR=Temporary Grounding Restriction
TTR=Temporary Transport Restriction

All three are areas around the president where 'public' space changes for the duration of the president being in the area.

Links:
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/jksonc/docs/bursey-dsc-d75.html
http://www.free-times.com/archive/coverstorarch/activists.html#bursey
http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/local/7645909.htm

[identity profile] low-delta.livejournal.com 2004-01-08 09:03 pm (UTC)(link)
Interesting info on the court case. Thank you.

I'm still concerned about the use of the charge. As long as it remains used on offenders such as him, that's fine.