Antiwar protesters trash 9/11 memorial!(blood pressure riser)

Wittier Dlily news ^ | 3-11-03 | OXENinFLA

[OXENinFLA]

LA HABRA -- Antiwar protesters burned and ripped up flags, flowers and patriotic signs at a Sept. 11 memorial that residents erected on a fence along Whittier Boulevard days after the terrorist attacks in 2001 and have maintained ever since.

However, although officers witnessed the vandalism Saturday afternoon, police did not arrest three people seen damaging the display because they were "exercising the same freedom of speech that the people who put up the flags were,' La Habra Police Capt. John Rees said Monday.

"For this to be vandalism, there had to be an ill-will intent,' he said.

[Teacher317]

In large part because the enemy now knows what to expect: police cover, token verbal resistance in the papers, and free publicity for their cause.

[My Favorite Headache]

Pissed off bump

[steve-b]

police did not arrest three people seen damaging the display because they were "exercising the same freedom of speech that the people who put up the flags were," La Habra Police Capt. John Rees said Monday.

WTF?? Where did this idiot learn to be a cop -- at the police academy depicted in the movie of that name???

[nicmarlo]

e-mail sent to O'Reilly:

Mr. O'Reilly,

This needs radio and t.v. attention:

Antiwar protesters trash 9/11 memorial
American flags burned and slashed
By Debbie Pfeiffer Trunnell, Staff Writer

Antiwar Protesters Trash 9/11 Memorial

My boyfriend, a County Sheriff Officer in central New York, states that in New York State this incident would have been an arrestable offense under Section 145.00 of the New York State Penal Law (criminal mischief in the 4th degree), a Class A misdemeanor, punishable by a $1,000 fine, a year in jail, or both. He is hard pressed to believe that California Penal Law would not have a similar section for the intentional destruction of another's property, regardless of whether there was "ill-will intent." The fact remains that it was intentional destruction of property that did not belong to the protesters and is against the law in all 50 states. In fact, according to his perusal of California Penal Section 594 (http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=594-625c), he believes they have violated subsection 2(a). Of course, Deputy Stevens is not a California Penal Law expert, but common sense would dictate that laws exist in California which prohibit vandalism/destruction of property belonging to another.

We regularly watch your program and are happy to see that you get results on important issues which you bring to the public's attention. We realize that freedom to express oneself is important; however, we do not believe that vandalism is freedom of _expression: the protesters could have burned their own flags and/or property, not a memorial to the victims of 9/11. Please do what you can to hold the La Habra Police Department accountable for their inaction.

Sincerely,

[WhyisaTexasgirlinPA]

You said it......... so if some pro-war citizens decided to do something in this guy's front yard, it would be free speech and not vandalism? What a moron.............

[Mo1]

Les Howard, a sociology professor at Whittier College, said the incident might be an indication of some confusion among people trying to stop a possible war against Iraq but uncertain how to express their sentiments. However, he said he does not condone the destruction of symbols important to those who erect them.

They asked a sociology professor to explain this???

[goldstategop]

They know Iraq = Good, America = Bad. They knew exactly what they were doing and what they did wasn't a half hearted gesture of confused half-assed punks. No, it was a deliberate assault on America's memory by Communist radicals who wanted to send the country a message and its pretty clear from their actions which side they're on. I don't need a sociology professor to have to explain it. What they did speaks for itself.

[ET(end tyranny)]

I didn't realize that defacing property that doesn't belong to you was 'free speech'. And destruction of said property IS ill intent!

[Mo1]

wonder if they feared an ACLU lawsuit?

These peacenicks, yes have a right to free speech but they don't have a right to destroy property .. public or private and these officers witness this and did nothing??

[Eowyn-of-Rohan]

I don't think they hate the USA, but I do think they have very little trust in, or respect for, our government.

[ET(end tyranny)]

Good letter. Perhaps O'Reilly will also point out the obvious double standard.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Here's MY version of free speech.

Hope this cop understands that when I'm persuading these antiwar protesters to support the troops, I'm just exercising my First Amendment rights.

[eyespysomething]

I emailed Boortz and Rush (with the 24/7 email address)

[Illbay]

"For this to be vandalism, there had to be an ill-will intent,' he said.

WHAT!?!?!?!?!?!?

[Illbay]

Apparently so, as long as you intend no ill-will.

[Illbay]

... is there any doubt that the perps would be facing a long gaol sentance as a hate crime?

Absolutely. And I'll be willing to bet they'd go to JAIL, too!

[Green Knight]

Scum of the Earth "peace" protester bump.

[JennysCool]

Bump to the Top -- and keep it there all day. This one needs BIG circulation.

[floriduh voter]

Your post clarified that this was CA, not Fla. When I was much younger, my Dad used to travel Whittier to get to his Ward Cleaver type job. California USED to be like Leave it to Beaver; seriesly. I was a Valley Girl once and still talk like one even though a Fla. transplant.

[Beck_isright]

Let's hope everyone emails these national hosts and drives the message home. The anti-war commies are not just "anti-war" they are pure, hateful, anti-American. Just like that fruitcake that was dressed up in the pink stuff on tv last night.