Posted on 04/21/2006 12:39:37 PM PDT by Jack Black
An old lady, almost in tears, with the cameraman soothing her. She looked not the least bit threatening.
"Harrassing"? Well, that's in the eye of the beholder. Do foreign dictators have a right not to be harrassed now? Is Washington D.C. now a Free-Speech Denied Zone?
As for the comment "your days are numbered", again I think it is a huge stretch to construe that as a threat. More of a classic Marxist pronouncement on the inevitability of history, or something.
I'm not shocked that this is being brought, but saddened. It is unworthy of our Republic to punish people for merely embarrassing tyrants. "The right to petition for redress of grievances". I would be a very hard jury-person to convince in this trial.
The most fitting punishment would be a firing of who ever was in charge of security. That was way too close to our POTUS for comfort!
Disgusting, but not surprising.
First the feds debate whether to charge the LEO in Mississippi who commandeered a truckload of ice to save lives in his jurisdiction.
And now this?
I hope the public response to this generates a surge to rival that of Katrina's.
This is rediculous.
More evidence that Bush is out of touch with reality.
Bush Admin now agrees words are "harassment?"
How PC of them.
Incredible.
Does this mean we can charge Helen Thomas or David Gregory for doing the same thing to President Bush?
If someone shouted: "President Bush, your days are numbered. President Hu, make him stop persecuting Al Qaeda" would you consider that a threat?
Better to be charged here instead of China where it might have cost her a liver and lungs.
I thought YOU were the one all for fully enforcing every law on the books?!
That was way too close to our POTUS for comfort!
Agree but that will not happen. In the average year, about 400 Federal employees are fired for cause and most of these retain their bloated retirement benefits.
Oh the joys of being a civil service "master."
That was the statement that led to the charges. Had she not said that she might have been given a pass. She personally threatened a head of state. Not too smart. She deserves what she gets.
I read yesterday that the cameraman (from the PRC) was attempting to cover her mouth to keep her from shouting.
Sic semper tyrannis. Too bad so many of us have forgotten. This is a brave woman, heroic even. She deserves better.
There's is no way she could have been there without the complicity of the Bush administration. Dubya's comments about human rights segued too well to not have been orchestrated.
The whole thing was ruse meant to shame the Butchers of Beijing while making it look like it was an accident.
There has to be a charade prosecuting her, but it will all go away.
Yes. Let the sister go!
"First the feds debate whether to charge the LEO in Mississippi who commandeered a truckload of ice to save lives in his jurisdiction.
And now this?
I hope the public response to this generates a surge to rival that of Katrina's."
Don't forget the 2nd Amendment-violating seizure of privately-owned firearms in New Orleans, post Katrina.
Bill of Rights? Who needs it?!
//sarc
Section 112. Protection of foreign officials, official guests, and internationally protected persons
(b) Whoever willfully -
(1) intimidates, coerces, threatens, or harasses a foreign official or an official guest or obstructs a foreign official in the performance of his duties;
(2) attempts to intimidate, coerce, threaten, or harass a foreign official or an official guest or obstruct a foreign official in the performance of his duties; or
(3) within the United States and within one hundred feet of any building or premises in whole or in part owned, used, or occupied for official business or for diplomatic, consular, or residential purposes by -
(A) a foreign government, including such use as a mission to an international organization;
(B) an international organization;
(C) a foreign official; or
(D) an official guest;
congregates with two or more other persons with intent to violate any other provision of this section; shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.
----------
However, I guess the feds didn't read this far:
(d) Nothing contained in this section shall be construed or applied so as to abridge the exercise of rights guaranteed under the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
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.