Hi everyone: On 6/11/07, Gena <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The right to freedom of speech is non-negotiable. It can't be withheld > due to the potential threat of violence.
Ohh?? So does that mean that people shouldn't be allowed to commute to and from work and home in Downtown Denver because the place where the convention will be housed is ALSO in Downtown Denver (Along with the many free speech areas)? One of the local city council members took the approach that one's right to commute to and from work and home is non-negotiable too. It may not be in the Constitution or any other legal document, but people shouldn't be FORCED TO TEMPORARILY RELOCATE or take time off from work just so a bunch of people can excercise their right to free speech while a bunch of other people turn the city upside down and inside out on national, if not international, television. And you know something? He's got a valid point. People SHOULD NOT have to temporarily relocate or take time off from work just so a bunch of people can excercise their right to free speech while a bunch of other people turn the city upside down and inside out on national, if not international, television. It's just not right. How would YOU like it if you had to put your life on hold because of this? You probably wouldn't like it too well, would you? There's got to be a common ground. It's there alright. It's just a process of finding it. > I have and continue to have serious disagreements with the policies of > the current administration. To some in this country that in and of > itself is act of treason. I'm not an anarchist. I would not and will > not condone any acts of destruction of personal or private property. Hey, I'm with you 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000% (If not more). :) > By the criteria you present my presence at the convention would be > disallowed. I cannot be an agent to assist in political profiling of > citizens based on group affiliation. If you have no intention of breaking the law, why would you fear being, as you put it, "disallowed"? > I appreciate the problems Denver will have concerning public safety. > It will not be easy to balance the rights of citizens with the > multiplicity of people who want to do harm, both foreign and domestic. > > I am only speaking for myself here. I don't believe using a blog/vlog > to prevent another person's from expressing their political freedom of > speech or to address concerns to their government is appropriate. Okay. What do you think IS an appropriate medium or method to accomplish this? > Challenge, yes. Dispute? You Betcha. Profile and prevent other > expression based on political affiliation? > > No. Well then, consider it a challenge. A challenge for the groups to explain their intentions in case they've somehow been misinterpreted. If the groups can't explain themselves, then I guess the original interpretation will just have to stand on their own merits (Whatever they're worth), now will they? > > Cheers :D -- Pat Cook Denver, Colorado WEBSITES - AS MY WACKED OUT WORLD TURNS - http://pchamster.livejournal.com/ PAT'S REAL DEAL VIDEO BLOG - http://patsrealdeal.livejournal.com/ Pat's Health & Medical Wonders VideoCast - http://patshealthmedicalwondersvideocast.blogspot.com/ MY LIVE CAM - http://patscam.camstreams.com/ YouTube Channel - http://www.youtube.com/amwowttv/ THE PAT COOK SHOW - http://www.livevideo.com/thepatcookshow
