View Full Version : Rev Terry Jones "vs" WBC
So, how is it that the WBC is protected in their protests but "Rev" Terry Jones gets thrown in jail for "potentially" disturbing the peace with his?
http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/IslamicLaw-Protest/2011/04/22/id/393836
(I am not saying WBC should have their 1A rights revoked, I am saying Jones should have his restored)
This is easy, WBC hate Americans, which is ok.
Terry Jones shows Muslims are violent and will kill over a book and that is not ok.
This is easy, WBC hate Americans, which is ok.
Terry Jones shows Muslims are violent and will kill over a book and that is not ok.
What an upside down world we live in.
So, how is it that the WBC is protected in their protests but "Rev" Terry Jones gets thrown in jail for "potentially" disturbing the peace with his?
Because communists hate our soldiers our families and our country.
What country do we live in???
jklaughrey
04-23-11, 15:08
What country do we live in???
Stalingrad circa 1960's!!!
Don Robison
04-23-11, 15:36
Beats me since they are friendly towards each other and have protested together. They are both scum. The only thing I can figure is that WBC has better lawyers.
GermanSynergy
04-23-11, 18:26
Even the Soviets were proud of their fallen servicemen. Fred Phelps would have been sent to a Gulag in short order in the CCCP.
Stalingrad circa 1960's!!!
Actually heard an interview about this on Canadian radio last night. They were interviewing the Dearborn Chief of Police or Attorney General, I can't remember which but there is more to the story. They met with him and he was making threats about shooting people at the Center if they interfered with his protest.
Beats me since they are friendly towards each other and have protested together. They are both scum. The only thing I can figure is that WBC has better lawyers.
This.
An Undocumented Worker
04-23-11, 20:15
Beats me since they are friendly towards each other and have protested together. They are both scum. The only thing I can figure is that WBC has better lawyers.
The WBC actually are lawyers, they make a large share of their cash reserves by sueing people who assault them.
Don Robison
04-23-11, 20:49
The WBC actually are lawyers, they make a large share of their cash reserves by sueing people who assault them.
Yep, I had forgotten about that.
Either way I have no use for WBC or Jones. I'm not too heart broken when they are hassled. One day they will protest the wrong person's funeral and..............................
Belmont31R
04-23-11, 21:20
The WBC is a lawyer group under the guise of being a church. They do the most disturbing things to goad people into a reaction like this latest false detainment thing in MS. They sue, win money, and continue down the road. The only good thing about their operation is they are further cementing free speech case law into the books. At the expense of soldier's funerals but hundreds of thousands of soldiers have died to protect our rights. And hey guess what geniuses....when the liberal gestapo comes after you for protesting for gun rights you can cite WBC generated case law in your favor.
The other guy needs lawyers and cash. That is the way our system works now. Its not about justice or rights....its about having money and money hires lawyers to go to bat for you. The lowly guy with no cash reserves to fight a case is just a ****ing pawn who's going to get tossed out with the garbage, and probably in an orange jumpsuit. So much for justice being blind.
This guy is no less of a scumbag than the WBC people. But he should not have been put in jail for what he "may do"
This loon appears to be doing more to defend our rights under the constitution than our elected leaders. His methods are ridiculous, incendiary, and yet, apparently necessary for people to open their eyes to the extent of the erosion of our constitutional rights and the threat to a greater diminishing of what makes us America.
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. - Declaration of Independence.
Don Robison
04-24-11, 17:37
This loon appears to be doing more to defend our rights under the constitution than our elected leaders.
Do you know anything about his organization? He doesn't do anything to defend anything except his messed up views. You might want to research him and his Dove World Outreach Center a little more. You think the government is oppressive; take a look at his organization if you want to see a classic example of police state oppression.
Do you know anything about his organization? He doesn't do anything to defend anything except his messed up views. You might want to research him and his Dove World Outreach Center a little more. You think the government is oppressive; take a look at his organization if you want to see a classic example of police state oppression.
I'm not talking about his organization, I could honestly care less. I'm sure the guy is a complete wingnut, which I stated, but even those still deserve to exercise their Constitutional rights and he's standing up for his. Instead he's locked up for a future "thought crime" rather than some law that he's actually broken.
Don Robison
04-24-11, 18:08
I'm not talking about his organization, I could honestly care less. I'm sure the guy is a complete wingnut, which I stated, but even those still deserve to exercise their Constitutional rights and he's standing up for his. Instead he's locked up for a future "thought crime" rather than some law that he's actually broken.
I wasn't aware that trying to provoke people was a protected right. I agree that he has the right to free speech, but all he's trying to do is provoke people which makes him an idiot loser. His freedom doesn't make him immune from consequences.
He also had an ND while he was up there so I guess he's working on protecting our second amendment rights as well. :sarcastic:
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2011/04/quran-burning-pastor-accidentally-fires-gun-on-eve-of-mich-anti-muslim-rally/1
willowofwisp
04-24-11, 20:30
I think both are total d bags but...I am not surprised about what happen in Dearborn, the Muslims have a lot of control in that city.
I wasn't aware that trying to provoke people was a protected right. I agree that he has the right to free speech, but all he's trying to do is provoke people which makes him an idiot loser. His freedom doesn't make him immune from consequences.
He also had an ND while he was up there so I guess he's working on protecting our second amendment rights as well. :sarcastic:
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2011/04/quran-burning-pastor-accidentally-fires-gun-on-eve-of-mich-anti-muslim-rally/1
He was threatening to use his gun as well. Which is why he got denied.
Don Robison
04-24-11, 23:16
He was threatening to use his gun as well. Which is why he got denied.
I had heard that also, but hadn't seen it reported anywhere so I left it alone.
I wasn't aware that trying to provoke people was a protected right. I agree that he has the right to free speech, but all he's trying to do is provoke people which makes him an idiot loser. His freedom doesn't make him immune from consequences.
I wasn't aware that people have the right to not be offended. The right to protest and hold demonstrations has been upheld under the protection of the 1st Amendment. The 1st Amendment isn't about popular speech, it's about protecting unpopular speech and those who wish to express it.
First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.
And yet in Iran they're free to protest...
http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/7411/iransprotestburnakorand.jpg
Don Robison
04-25-11, 11:50
I wasn't aware that people have the right to not be offended. The right to protest and hold demonstrations has been upheld under the protection of the 1st Amendment. The 1st Amendment isn't about popular speech, it's about protecting unpopular speech and those who wish to express it.
I'm not talking about offending people; I'm talking about provoking people to commit violence(crime). This guy is doing nothing to defend rights. He's nothing more that the white religious zealot version of Farrakhan. If you agree that he and his buddies at Westboro have a right to protest funerals maybe you should join them.
If you agree that he and his buddies at Westboro have a right to protest funerals maybe you should join them.
You obviously have reading comprehension issues so I'll try to spell it out a little simpler for you. This has nothing to do with protesting military funerals. This thread is all about him being jailed for the possibility that his protesting in front of a mosque would somehow, just maybe, disturb the peace.
Don Robison
04-25-11, 13:22
You obviously have reading comprehension issues so I'll try to spell it out a little simpler for you. This has nothing to do with protesting military funerals. This thread is all about him being jailed for the possibility that his protesting in front of a mosque would somehow, just maybe, disturb the peace.
You're stupid if you think him and his reputation as a whole has no play in how he is treated.
theblackknight
04-25-11, 17:04
You're stupid if you think him and his reputation as a whole has no play in how he is treated.
Quit durping. He burned Kurans and incited Deadly violence in the world.
Now he wants to do it in Dearborn and has to prove muzzies wont go apeshit? Like its his fault they cant handle a little free speech. The bias here in straight out in the open.THAT is the issue, how one is ok,but the other isnt.
Has there even been violence at a WBC protest???? YES
So why dont they have to prove anything?
This is the issue Don.
You're stupid if you think him and his reputation as a whole has no play in how he is treated.
So if OJ sets foot in a Casino he should be arrested? (ignoring the fact he is in the hoosegow already)
Don Robison
04-25-11, 17:39
So if OJ sets foot in a Casino he should be arrested? (ignoring the fact he is in the hoosegow already)
If he's been barred from going near the casino like Jones was barred from going near the muslim center; yes he should be arrested.
A few facts you guys seem to be overlooking.
1. The prosecutor filed a suit to keep him away and it was legally upheld. The based their argument on the size of the easement that was to be used for the protest not being sufficient in size for the amount of people and no parking being available which would cause considerable danger to both sides of the protest as well as considerable cost to an already bankrupt city.
2. He refused to comply and was arrested for that refusal.
3. The "Peace Bond" law they used dates back to 1846 and has been upheld in previous case law.
Somehow you seem to think I don't think he has a right to free speech. I've always maintained that he does; he doesn't have a right to create a dangerous situation which his previous protests have proven to be. If the city doesn't want to pay to babysit him; they aren't obligated just because he wants to run his mouth, but they are obligated to do what they feel is right for their city and residents. There are plenty of muslim centers for him to protest down here in FL; there is a CAIR center less than two hours from his church. I suppose that would be too convenient for him though and he wouldn't get the press time if he were told to STFU in his own back yard. :rolleyes:
BTW: Another compromise that was offered to him was that he pay the city for the extra security; he refused. He wants to play, but thinks he has no obligation to pay for his playing.
Quit durping. He burned Kurans and incited Deadly violence in the world.
Now he wants to do it in Dearborn and has to prove muzzies wont go apeshit? Like its his fault they cant handle a little free speech. The bias here in straight out in the open.THAT is the issue, how one is ok,but the other isnt.
Has there even been violence at a WBC protest???? YES
So why dont they have to prove anything?
This is the issue Don.
Protest permits are universally upheld. He made threats, he refused to pay a peace bond (protest permit sorta), he got denied by a sitting judge. This would be a non issue on here if it was hippies.
My hometown has frequent anti war protests and they require a $500k insurance bond with the city for emergency services and after the limited duration protest permit expires the permit holders get an itemized bill for police overtime. If people fail to disperse when the permit expires they go in with CS gas, zip ties, and arrest everyone for failing to obey a lawful order. It has held up in court repeatedly.
You gotta play by the rules if you want to play.
Don Robison
04-25-11, 21:37
Quit durping. He burned Kurans and incited Deadly violence in the world.
Now he wants to do it in Dearborn and has to prove muzzies wont go apeshit? Like its his fault they cant handle a little free speech. The bias here in straight out in the open.THAT is the issue, how one is ok,but the other isnt.
Has there even been violence at a WBC protest???? YES
So why dont they have to prove anything?
This is the issue Don.
The issue is that he was legally forbidden according to current Michigan state law from the site he wanted to protest. Law that has case law behind it since 1848. Ya' don't have to like it, but it's their law. Could he win a lawsuit and get the law changed? Possibly, but it won't change my opinion of him; he's scum.
Maybe we'll get lucky and his next ND will be in his mouth.
Protest permits are universally upheld. He made threats, he refused to pay a peace bond (protest permit sorta), he got denied by a sitting judge. This would be a non issue on here if it was hippies.
My hometown has frequent anti war protests and they require a $500k insurance bond with the city for emergency services and after the limited duration protest permit expires the permit holders get an itemized bill for police overtime. If people fail to disperse when the permit expires they go in with CS gas, zip ties, and arrest everyone for failing to obey a lawful order. It has held up in court repeatedly.
You gotta play by the rules if you want to play.
Does WBC have to get a permit for their protests? Can they be denied a place to protest due to permitting etc?
How many people was this Jones guy having at his protest?
I think these bonds and permits and stuff are meant for large organized protests, not a few people out with signs.
Does WBC have to get a permit for their protests? Can they be denied a place to protest due to permitting etc?
How many people was this Jones guy having at his protest?
I think these bonds and permits and stuff are meant for large organized protests, not a few people out with signs.
It depends on local law. I assume that most of the towns that WBC protest in don't have comprehensive ordinances in regard to assembly. They are called time place manner restrictions, as in the government can control the time, place, and manner of free speech, but not the content.
The one I'm most familiar with has no defined number of persons.
No persons, society or organization of any name or nature shall assemble in any outdoor place without first securing a permit therefor in accordance with this section.
And then there is a bunch of stuff where they require a sworn statement about the size, number of people, proof of ID of the organizers, zoning map of the area etc.
No permit shall be issued unless the applicant shall furnish the city with a comprehensive liability insurance policy, issued by a company duly licensed by the State of ******* insuring the applicant against liability for damage to persons or property with limits of not less than five hundred thousand/one million dollars ($500,000./$1,000,000.) for bodily injury or death and limits of not less than one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.) for property damage, which said policy shall name the city as an additional insured and shall be noncancelable without prior written notice to the town.
And finally
All persons attending the event shall obey the lawful commands of police officers and shall at all times conduct themselves in a lawful manner.
This is the part that protestors almost never follow. No size requirement or anything, just can't control content. Permits also wouldn't be issued if it was deemed a safety hazard. There were tons of campus riots here in the '60s is where most of it comes from, and they have held up in court to present day. The bills cant be small either because one protest can easily go through 3-4 LE jurisdictions.
The man went to incite violence. I will say I'm shocked. I made a comment in a previous thread that if he has balls he should visit dearborn and build a bonfire of korans. I guess he's a member here lmao.
Anyhow... He didn't go to use his 1st amendment, he went to cause problems and with the hopes that violence would occur and he would get some press, he's a media whore. And thankfully some people have the balls to see through his circus show for the piece of shit he is.
He's no different than these little ****ing "anarchist" who run around during the hippie rallies all dressed in black covering their faces and causing a ruckus.
WBC as shitty of a people as they are the only ones who they risk bringing violence against is themselves.
Mr. Jones endangers the lives of Muslims by being a fn looney and inciting other loonies. And them would be fighting words, something not protected under the 1st :D And it works both ways, if it's a Muslim preaching the reverse of what Mr. Jones is doing he needs to have his speech limited as well, since it is constitutional and has been since the founding of this country to limit speech with it enacts violence.
http://www.bsos.umd.edu/gvpt/gvpt339/fightingwords.html
If I get behind a podium and call him a bigot small minded shit head, It's no longer free speech :) And I'm not longer protected by the 1st, of course I don't feel this way about Mr. Jones, I'm simply using it as an example of speech no protected :)
He's no different than these little ****ing "anarchist" who run around during the hippie rallies all dressed in black covering their faces and causing a ruckus.
You mean the police right??? They've been used multiple times at different demonstrations and protests as agent provocateurs to incite riots, damage property and give the uniformed police a reason to be there and arrest people.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2007/08/23/police-montebello.html
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/248608
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8261550/Police-surveillance-row-grows-as-third-undercover-officer-identified.html
I'm going to work but do a little Google search and you'll come up with multiple examples.
1st post and all that jazz.....
WBC are ALL Lawyers. They flood the court with so many briefs and petitions and stuff that they just slide by.
You mean the police right??? They've been used multiple times at different demonstrations and protests as agent provocateurs to incite riots, damage property and give the uniformed police a reason to be there and arrest people.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2007/08/23/police-montebello.html
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/248608
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8261550/Police-surveillance-row-grows-as-third-undercover-officer-identified.html
I'm going to work but do a little Google search and you'll come up with multiple examples.
It's OT but the cops had to copy someone. When I was younger and living in the UK-- I'd say most of them are spoiled suburban kids. They seem to think breaking into power plants is going to save the Earth as well.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.