Posted on 08/11/2004 12:20:35 AM PDT by GAGOPSWEEPTOVICTORY
August 11, 2004 -- The city yesterday shot down a last-ditch effort by a protest group to demonstrate in Central Park during the Republican convention after the group pulled a sudden U-turn and reneged on a deal to use the West Side Highway for a 250,000- person rally.
~snip~
United for Peace and Justice leaders have balked at using the West Side Highway, saying they've discovered a number of problems with the setting, including a lack of shade and water.
"We believe that exiling a rally to a remote stretch of sunbaked highway makes a mockery of the constitutionally protected right to freely assemble," said UPJ national coordinator Leslie Cagan.
~snip~
Two smaller, Washington-based groups — a national Arab organization and another called "Answers" — said yesterday they have already filed lawsuits in Manhattan federal court in hopes of also being allowed to rally in Central Park.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Go crawl back under the rock where you came from hippies.
Hell, send 'em to Boston... they've got a free speech cage already set up there.
And these whiney Leftists think they deserve special treatment? Ha! Got news for those Fifth Column Useful Idiots: pound sand, suckers!
Probably get the same leftist judge (that said it was illegal to search them for things like bombs) who'll let them have the Park... too bad Rudy's not still there, they'd be staging down in Harlem or in Brooklyn..better yet across the River in Jersey... West Side Highway is closer to the Convention than Central Park anyway.
These people should be allowed to protest publicly in an area adjacent to the convention; and not in a cage like the one in Boston. That was a shameful travesty for citizens to be villified and criminalized for simply exersizing their 1st Ammendment Constitutional rights. You always see posts about 'freeper' rallies, protests, etc. on this site. Do you think this right to protest and demonstrate only applies to one group that you agree with? if so, I suggest you study the foundations of our republic, our liberties, and rethink your answer. This isnt masters vs servants, royalty vs subjects/serfs here. this is the United States.
If the protests are allowed in Central Park, it will become a riot. It is as simple as that. Any judge who allows protests in Central Park is condoning a riot.
There is no way on God's Green Earth the NYPD is going to let protesters sleep in the park. There is no way the protesters would leave at the end of the day. So the NYPD would have to push them out.
This is a recipe for riot. Inevitable, deadly riot. Any judge who grants a permit to protest in the park better also have the cojones to grant a permit to sleep in the park, or there will be Hell to pay.
Screw 'em. The city had a deal.
There is no area adjacent to Madison Square Garden that will accommodate the 250,000 protestors they anticipate.
Furthermore, they want Central Park, and that's not even close to being "adjacent" to the convention.
These people cost the city tons of money every time they decide to have a protest. The last time Leslie Cagan threw a rally, the bill for security and cleanup came to 9 million dollars. Speech is only "free" for them, the rest of us gotta pay for it.
"These people should be allowed to protest publicly in an area adjacent to the convention; and not in a cage like the one in Boston. That was a shameful travesty for citizens to be villified and criminalized for simply exersizing their 1st Ammendment Constitutional rights. You always see posts about 'freeper' rallies, protests, etc. on this site. Do you think this right to protest and demonstrate only applies to one group that you agree with? if so, I suggest you study the foundations of our republic, our liberties, and rethink your answer. This isnt masters vs servants, royalty vs subjects/serfs here. this is the United States."
The Democrats caged their protesters. The Republicans gave them a spot where they are 5 blocks from the event. The protestors panties are all bunched up because they want to dictate where they want to protest as well as have the city pay for it.
The protestors should have come up with a plan as to how their organization would fund the protest(they should have brought their own sound system, water and train fare) and presented it to the city. Instead they made demands. The Constitution guarantees the right to free assembly. It does not however tell the group being protested to pay for it. (This isn't divorce court where the husband pays the wifes legal fees)
The Democrats set the precedent in allowing the protestors to be caged like rats in Boston. You never heard one peep from the protestors. They should be grateful they got a spot on the West Side highway.
In addition, these groups have a propensity for violence as well as making a huge mess. It will be easier and less expensive for the city to send in some sweepers and clean the streets then it would to have the park cleaned. Who would pay for that? Again, the protestors should have come up with this plan and gave it to the city. I am sure Soros would have invested a couple of mil.
You are right, this is the United States. However, this is not a constitutional issue. It is a logistics issuer where the protesting group brought nothing to the table except demands and for that they got what the city had to offer. They can take it, like the caged rats did in Boston, or they can leave it, break the law and go to jail. If it is the second choice, may their records be brought up and if they have any priors, be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
I have faith in the NYPD...really I do. The organization has been around in some shape or form since 1626. Do you realize how many riots NYC has had since then? If these punks think they are being so original, they should think again, b/c the NYPD has been dealing with thugs like them for a very long time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.