Skip to comments.
DC Chapter Forms "Human Shield" to Protect White House Sunday
Associated Press photos
| 1/18/03
| Associated Press
Posted on 01/19/2003 10:32:38 AM PST by FreeTheHostages
As those of you watching Foxnews national know, the "peace" protestors continue to protest here in Washington. They're on a march from the Justice Department to the White House, and one of the things they say they want to do is inspect President Bush's "presidential palace" for weapons.
Saddam uses humans as shields in times of war. But of course these "peace" protestors wouldn't harm innocent civilians. So some memberes of the DC Chapter of Free Republic are forming a "human shield."
TOPICS: Breaking News; Free Republic; News/Current Events; US: District of Columbia; US: Maryland; US: Virginia
KEYWORDS: dcchapter; hughhewitt; iraq
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160, 161-170 next last
To: mountaineer
Looks like our DC chapter came under assault from the loonies.We were way far away from them. The police organizations in DC are very well trained in crowd control. I'm sure that those that decided to climb the barracade got to lie on the ground for a bit. That's ok in the spring but not Today.
To: FreeTheHostages
FtH, we had fun Today. Hope you're thawed out. Thanks for putting up the thread. Look for tgsl's pictures as you'll find them quite amusing.
To: RonDog
Thanks for the links, Ron.
Bump.
To: RonDog
Gave it a 5.... YAHOO!!!!!!!!!
To: b4its2late
FReep on!!! Thanks!
Avg Rating: 3.59, 114 votes - Your Rating: 5
125
posted on
01/19/2003 7:36:41 PM PST
by
RonDog
To: thepitts
It wasn't that stupid was it?
To: thepitts
I hope that's a felony...it should be.A felony as opposed to a misdemeanor. Surely those protesters didn't climb that barricade so they could spend a few years in the Federal Penitentiary.
To: FreeTheHostages
:
:
128
posted on
01/20/2003 1:09:39 AM PST
by
ppaul
To: FreeTheHostages
129
posted on
01/20/2003 6:51:08 AM PST
by
Xthe17th
(FREE THE STATES. Repudiate the 17th amendment!)
To: FreeTheHostages
There is no difference between the mentality of these renta mobbers than the mentality of the Clintoon and his cabinet members. Unfortunately, they controlled our foriegn policy during the Carter and Clintoon years.
The problem is our State Department is loaded with career GS anti America employees and has been since the late 1960's on today.
130
posted on
01/20/2003 7:41:16 AM PST
by
Grampa Dave
(Free Republic, the site supported by those who don't believe in free lunches! Are you a donor?)
To: LuvUSA
Its not a law....It was an Act of Congress that is no longer in effect..(SEC4)...read before you reply. I'm just making those realize that they are lucky to that this act is no longer in place,.Actually, we're all lucky this law is no longer in place, or the First Amendment would have been stillborn...
131
posted on
01/20/2003 7:46:42 AM PST
by
dirtboy
To: dirtboy
So, Do you think it is ok to allow (not protest), but blatantly call to overthrow our government at rallies while aligning with known terrorist organizations and other outside factions that want to do the same? I/m not trying argue, we're on the same side and I see the point about the first amendment. I belive in protest. thats what we're doing after all. What do you think should be done???
132
posted on
01/20/2003 7:59:04 AM PST
by
LuvUSA
To: LuvUSA
SEC. 2. And be it further enacted, That if any person shall write, print, utter or publish, or shall cause or procure to be written, printed, uttered or publishing, or shall knowingly and willingly assist or aid in writing, printing, uttering or publishing any false, scandalous and malicious writing or writings against the government of the United States, or either house of the Congress of the United States, or the President of the United States, with intent to defame the said government, or either house of the said Congress, or the said President, or to bring them, or either of them, into contempt or disreputeAfter arguing during the Constitutional ratification conventions that a Bill of Rights was not needed to protect freedom of the press, the Federalists then turned around some ten years later and passed the law above, which restricted freedom of the press. It was a blatant violation of the First Amendment.
The Sedition Act was never tested for Constitutionality before the Supreme Court but it was repealed after protests by Thomas Jefferson and James Monroe, among others. Jefferson argued that the federal government did not have the authority to exercise powers not delegated to it by the Constitution. Monroe questioned the constitutionality of the Act.
After repeal, the Federalists gradually disappeared from the national scene politically. Hopefully that will happen sooner, rather than later, to McLain and others who have restricted political free speech through unconstitutional Campaign Finance Reform.
To: LuvUSA
What do you think should be done???Counter their arguments with our better arguments. About the only people impressed by these idiots are the twenty percent of the populace who are hard-core Dems. And for all their talk of overthrowing the government, considering they're also typically in favor of gun control, they are not exactly in a position of strength to press those demands.
134
posted on
01/20/2003 8:07:40 AM PST
by
dirtboy
To: dirtboy
Thanks....I completly understand...knowledge is power. It just kills me to see poeple literally saying they want to overthrow the govt!!! AAAARRRGGHHH
GOD BLESS AMERICA
135
posted on
01/20/2003 8:36:58 AM PST
by
LuvUSA
To: OneLoyalAmerican
"More lessons learned toward become better FReepers."
Hmm, I dunno -- the lessons you suggest Kristinn et al already knew. It was really clear in our written communications and in all of the interviews that we were Pro-USA, not "pro-war." Disarming Saddam and supporting Bush's policy. The fact that one media person took liberties, and most couldn't get over our clear definitions of ourselves to lie about what we stood for, should be scored as a success. The lesson here, which we've long learned, is that you can't expect 100 percent with the liberal media.
To: Stultis
A scotch swilling socialist? Can't you at least withhold your affections for bourbon drinkers?!
Yeah, it's inexcusable -- although he's definitely allied with us on many issues, so I don't know what "socialist" means any more. Hitchens is generally called a conservative by the liberal intellectuals here in DC, but probably just because they think that's an insult -- LOL. What can I say, he's very very smart and smart is sexy.
To: Brad's Gramma
Yeah, at the Marine barracks we had signs that said that.
I had one that said they should thank a veteran for their right to walk with terrorists and protest.
('Cause A.N.S.W.E.R. is allied with terrorism -- the Worker's World Party.)
To: RonDog; kristinn
I gave it a great big 5!
And I put Kristin's photo up as wallpaper!
139
posted on
01/20/2003 10:43:19 AM PST
by
.30Carbine
(Very proud of DC Chapter FReepers)
To: FreeTheHostages
Greetings FTH:
UGH! I was afraid that was the case.
This makes me want to puke.
140
posted on
01/20/2003 10:49:41 AM PST
by
OneLoyalAmerican
((1) Ramsey Clark is a: (A) Sleazy lawyer. (B) Seditious sock puppet. (C) Traitor. (D) All are true.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160, 161-170 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson