CNN: Flying Mexican Flag Over US Flag Is OK

NewsBusters.org ^ | Richard Newcomb

[SandRat]

A Mexican bar owner in Reno Nevada flew the Mexican flag above that of the United States. Only problem is that this is specifically illegal under United States Code Section 7, Title Four, which states,

(c) No other flag or pennant should be placed above or, if on the same level, to the right of the flag of the United States of America, except during church services conducted by naval chaplains at sea, when the church pennant may be flown above the flag during church services for the personnel of the Navy. No person shall display the flag of the United Nations or any other national or international flag equal, above, or in a position of superior prominence or honor to, or in place of, the flag of the United States at any place within the United States or any Territory or possession thereof: Provided, That nothing in this section shall make unlawful the continuance of the practice heretofore followed of displaying the flag of the United Nations in a position of superior prominence or honor, and other national flags in positions of equal prominence or honor, with that of the flag of the United States at the headquarters of the United Nations.

The brazen effrontery of the bar prompted an American veteran to cut down both flags. But when CNN reported on the event, they managed to significantly skew the perception. The CNN report simply states that the veteran was angry that the Mexican flag was placed above that of the US- no mention was made that it was in fact illegal under US law. CNN compounded their offense by showing in their video clip, not the actual words of the relevant US code that outlaws this action, but instead 'flag rules' taken from USHistory.org, thus downplaying the actual offense, by suggesting that athe law is in fact merely recommended behavior. As in so much relating to the illegal alien lobby, apprently it is OK with CNN for immigrants to disrespect and/or disobey the laws of our country, but let one American try to react, and they scream bloody murder. Balance? What balance? Cross-posted on StoneHeads.

[donnab]

Bravo nicely put.

[Califreak]

I’m so dam sick of folks waving other flags to try and make a point in OUR country!!!!!

You go oldsmaj!

[Melas]

It’s not really a law, and hence there are no enforcement or punative provisions. The flag code is more akin to ettiquite than law.

[Melas]

You’re making a fool of yourself. You don’t get the ability to declare war all by your lonesome.

Brousard (sp?) had it right. In a clear act of civil disobedience, he stated his name, his intent and proceded to steal that guy’s flag. My hat is off to him for his courage in defying the law out of love for his country.

What I can’t abide is this pseudo logic that spins it as a legal action. It was not. Brousard is more the man for standing up and acting in defiance than everyone who’s trying to make it sound like it was anything but.

[geopyg]

I don’t have quite the guts for physical confrontation that you have. However, the day after 9/11 I drove by a fast-food restaurant that had the flag had full staff. When I went past the second time I decided to go in and let them know it should be at half-staff.

It was an older muslim couple behind the counter and some younger muslims working (A family? - The lady and a girl wiht the head scarf, etc.) Anyway - I mentioned it to them politely and in broken English the man said the rope/pulley doesn’t work.

I left and went around back to take a look and it worked just fine. Brought Old Glory down to half staff (I think that was okay - you raise it up full, then back down to half?). Then went back in and told them I was able to “fix” it.

Then called the local cops and the FBI tipline about it.

Went by a few days later and no flag was up. Still isn’t, but not sure who runs the place anymore.

[Melas]

So then, are you saying that you are OK with the action of flying a mexican flag over/above an American flag on our soil?

One does not preclude the other. It is absolutely wrong to fly another nation's flag above the Stars and Stripes. However, it was still illegal for Brousard to vandalize the owners flag pole and steal his flag. Note that Brousard did this in broad daylight with full disclosure of his idenity, and his intention. That's civil disobedience and civil disobedience done right.

[RinaseaofDs]

This must have been what the 1920’s were like. It seemed like a very similar time, where anything goes. Even the way we handled law enforcement was different and wanton.

We say we are tired of war, but there’s a segment of our country’s people that find valor repugnent. They live in a winning country, but because they hate themselves, and they feel as if everything should be brought to their level.

I’m not talking about poverty, but about self-loathing. It’s something that isn’t socio-economic. They are both rich and poor.

You’re seeing it every day. People like Britney Spears, or that actor that tried to kill himself last month. Good looking, rich, successful, and they are desperately unhappy people.

They’re made at the United States, at God, at Organized Religion, at the Boy Scouts of America, and EVERYTHING that represents anything resembling hope, because from that depth, it all looks like a scam.

The United States is alive and well. It’s just that television and movies are controlled by these unhappy people. They are the inventor of scams, and they think they know one when they see one.

Our society is suffering from media toxicity and consumerism, that’s all.

If you don’t believe me, go to an airport and buy a Marine a beer, and you’ll be just fine at the end of the conversation. Better still, volunteer to staff the USO at the airport - its therapy. They should charge people for it.

You will meet the finest people in the world, much less our country, and you will NEVER see them on TV - ever.

We got rid of the TV in the family room. I have to tell you, it was the BEST thing we ever did. We took it out of our bedroom too - I haven’t had more sex since I was single.

I’m not saying TV is all bad. It isn’t. The problem is that when its on, we think it’s benign, but it seeps cynicism in so many subtle ways.

I’d turn the TV off and go do something positive. The inmates are running the asylum we call the Entertainment Industry.

[Brandie]

Excellent thank you!

[Brandie]

You are so wrong B-Chan.

I am proud and honored to read what OldSmaj wrote. What you wrote only makes me think of apathy. I would venture to say that I think there are more of us that would do just what OldSmaj said then to sit back and do nothing.

[B-Chan]

Dear Fellow FReeper:

Thank you for writing. Your opinion has been noted. However, as further conversation on this topic can serve no constructive purpose, I have chosen to cease posting replies to this thread.

Sincerely,

B-Chan

[FreedomPoster]

CWII Ping.

Another story on the veteran taking down the Mexican flag being flown over the U.S. flag.

In particular, in this thread, be sure to see OldSmaj’s post #10, the replied-to post.

[Travis McGee]

While I agree with the sentiments of this gentleman, it is still LEGAL to fly the Mexican, Confederate, or any other flag you want under the FIRST AMENDMENT!

That may or may not be technically true. What is beyond dispute is that flying the flag of Mexico above the US flag on US soil is a declaration of war to millions of Americans. Civil wars have started over such issues.

U.S. Constitution, Article 4 Section 4:

"The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government,

and shall protect each of them against Invasion;"

---

Invasion: \In*va"sion\, n. [L. invasio: cf. F. invasion. See Invade.] [1913 Webster]

1. The act of invading; the act of encroaching upon the rights or possessions of another; encroachment; trespass.

[FreedomPoster]

These need to be on this thread, too. Those arguing with Oldsmaj, in particular, need to ponder the significance.

[Travis McGee]

There seems to be a difference of opinion about who owns the Southwest, so let me take this opportunity....

"The True History of the Southwest, 101"

The amount of historical idiocy and fallacies surrounding the history of the Southwest is staggering, chief among them the "Aztlan" fairy tales. What's the truth? How did the Spanish Europeans conquer the Southwest? The "conquistadores" (that means "conquerors") did it with the lance, and the lash.

For example, in 1541 Coronado entered present-day New Mexico (which included present-day Arizona during the Spanish era) searching for the "lost cities of gold." One of his first actions upon meeting the natives was to burn 100s of them alive in their dwellings, for not handing over suspected horse thieves. That is how Spain conquered the natives of the present US Southwest--not with hugs and kisses! It was certainly no love-fest between long-lost brown-skinned soul-mates, as it is often portrayed today by the delusional Aztlaners, who spin the "new bronze race of Mestizos" toro-mierda.

By 1821, Mexico City was strong enough to overthrow even more decrepit and ineffectual Spanish rule. However, the distant provinces of the current U.S. Southwest were far beyond the reach of the authority of the independent but strife-torn government of Mexico City. These distant northern provinces received neither military protection nor needed levels of trade from the south. Under Spanish rule, trade with the USA was forbidden, but at least Spain provided trade and Army protection from hostile Indians. Under Mexican neglect, the Southwest received neither trade nor protection from Mexico City.

For example, Comanches and Apaches ran rampant in the 1830s in this new power vacuum created by Mexican neglect, burning scores of major ranches that had been around for hundreds of years and massacring their inhabitants. Mexico City could neither defend nor keep the allegiance of its nominal subjects in these regions. Nor did it provide needed levels of trade to sustain the prior Spanish-era standard of living. Mexican governmental influence atrophied, withered and died at the same time that American pathfinders were opening up new routes into the region.

Increasingly, a growing America was making inroads into the Southwest, via ships into California, and via gigantic wagon trains of trade goods over the Santa Fe Trail from St. Louis. The standard of living of the SPANISH in these provinces subsequently increased enormously, which is why they did not support Mexico City in the 1846-48 war. In fact, the Spanish-speaking inhabitants of the Southwest NEVER considered themselves "Mexicans" at all, ever. They went, in their own eyes, from SPANISH directly to AMERICAN. To this very day, if you want a punch in the nose, just call an Hispanic native of New Mexico a "Mexican!"

So how long did Mexico City have even nominal control over the Southwest? For only 25 years, during which they had no effective control, and the area slipped backwards by every measure until the arrival of the Americans. The SPANISH inhabitants of the Southwest NEVER transferred their loyalty to Mexico City, because all they received from the chaotic Mexican government was misrule, neglect, and unchecked Indian raids.

Since then, how long has the area been under firm American control? For 150 continuous years, during which time the former Spanish inhabitants of the region, now American citizens, have prospered beyond the wildest dreams of the Mexicans still stuck in Mexico. To compare the infrastructure, roads, schools, hospitals etc of the two regions is to understand the truth. The Mexican government has been mired in graft, corruption, nepotism and chaos from the very start. The ordinary Mexican peons have been trampled and abused, while only the super-rich elites have thrived. This is why millions of Mexicans want to escape from Mexico today, to enjoy the benefits of living in America that they can never hope to obtain in Mexico.

And because today Mexico is a corrupt third-world pest-hole, (despite having more millionaires than England), we are now supposed to let any Mexican from Chiapas, Michoacan or Yucatan march into the American Southwest, and make some "historical claim" of a right to live there?

From where does this absurd idea spring?

At what point in history did Indians and Mestizos from Zacatecas or Durango stake a claim on the American Southwest? Neither they nor their ancestors ever lived for one single day in the American Southwest. The Spanish living in the Southwest in 1846 stayed there, and became Americans by the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. There were no Spanish inhabitants of the Southwest who were marched to the border and driven into Mexico. It didn't happen. The SPANISH in the Southwest welcomed American citizenship, which brought stability, protection from Indian raids, and a vast increase in their standard of living with the increase in trade.

In summary, NO current inhabitants of Mexico have ANY claim on even one single inch of the Southwest! NOT ONE citizen of Mexico is sneaking into the USA to reclaim property their ancestors were deprived of, NOT ONE.

They are criminal invaders and colonizers, pure and simple.

It's time Americans learned the true history, as a counter to the prevalent Aztlaner fairy tales.

[FreedomPoster]

>>>While I agree with the sentiments of this gentleman, it is still LEGAL to fly the Mexican, Confederate, or any other flag you want under the FIRST AMENDMENT! How many times do I need to repeat myself?

So presumably if the army of a foreign invader were on our soil, you’d argue we couldn’t do anything about it, due to the Second Amendment?

[TexConfederate1861]

BRAVO! here,here!

[FreedomPoster]

See post 115 just above. Same question for you.

[TexConfederate1861]

I wish you guys would NOT bring the Confederate Flag into the argument. I would NEVER fly the Battle flag ABOVE the US Flag. NOT EVER......

I do fly the Texas Flag at the same level, but that is correct.

[Leatherneck_MT]

“No person shall display the flag of the United Nations or any other national or international flag equal, above, or in a position of superior prominence or honor to, or in place of, the flag of the United States at any place within the United States or any Territory or possession thereof:

That makes no mention of “government offices”

[FreedomPoster]

Please note I was just quoting Clemenza. I think you probably realize that, just want to be 100% certain.