Outrage!!

[Bzzzz]

Fed. judge says it's illegal to protest the war-even if the war itself is illegal!!!!(Catholics take note...)

http://ncronline.org/NCR_Online/archives2/2005b/061705/061705p.htm

[LightningFlash]

1. On Bush, Condi, Rumsfeld....

The writings on the wall now pseudo-fascists......You can't arrest us and you can't stop us. :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

You have no idea how many are pissed off now.....The day of reckoning is coming to your doors.

[Mandate My Ass]

2. Well obviously we now know why recruitment is so low

These kinds of domestic terrorists, particularly the two nuns, are scaring the teeming hordes of volunteers away. :eyes:

[Norquist Nemesis]

3. Last paragraph...Place yer bets!!

"It is not clear who requested federal prosecution for the St. Patrick’s Four. McAvoy denied the defendants request for “a copy of all communications” between state and federal prosecutors. The office of Ithaca District Attorney George M. Dentes, who closed the case at the state level, said it could not comment on a trial that was not in their jurisdiction."

Now who in the world could that be that would make the decision at the Federal level? Hmmmm?

[ProdigalJunkMail]

4. No...not what was charged...not what was said

please read...

<snip>
a federal grand jury charged the four activists, all of whom were arrested during a previous demonstration at the Lansing recruiting station, with two counts of criminal trespass, destruction of government property and conspiring to induce “by force, intimidation and threat, officers of the United States to leave the place where their duties as officers of the United States are required to be performed.
<end-snip>

You can protest all you like...but criminal trespass, destruction of property and threatening an officer of any government agency will land you in jail just about every time.

theProdigal

[Mandate My Ass]

6. the last part of the indictment sounds like the PATRIOT ACT

I do believe they broke the law as you said, but a jury acquitted them and now they're hauling out the PA to get around charges of double jeopardy.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

8. i am simply frustrated by the level

of hysteria around things like this. The OP essentially proffered a misleading statement that exacerbates the actual situation. A federal judge said nothing CLOSE to what the OP states. Also, the PA has nothing to do with the destruction of property and trespass as mentioned.

Sorry, this sort of thing pisses me off. There should be no exception to the right to speak in this country (hell, I hate those damned 'free speech zones' too) but when you start breaking stuff...that goes too far.

theProdigal

ONEDIT : I am not commenting on their guilt or innocence as I know little to nothing of the case...but if they did what they were charged with, then they should be convicted...

[Mandate My Ass]

10. They didn't break anything

they sprinkled some blood around.

They were tried and acquitted and now the feds are ramping up the charges to some murky "intimidation of an officer." What's the burden of proof on that?

Prosecutor: "Officer Jones, did you feel intimidated by some nuns sprinkling blood on the floor?"

Officer Jones: "Why yes I did."

Jury: "Guilty as charged ."

Judge: "I sentence you to the maximum six years imprisonment because we can't have nuns running around intimidating officers during wartime."

I understand your frustration on the points you mentioned but this is scary. If you think that's hyseria, so be it.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

11. you are not required to provide proof until a trial

the grand jury has made these charges...not one person. The trial will take place and a jury will either convict or acquit. Until that time nothing has been done that is wrong here. They have been charged of a crime for which a federal grand jury feels there is sufficient evidence to go to trial. Either you have faith in the trial by jury system or not. No one person makes this call...

And to my thinking the OP claiming that a judge has somehow taken away the rights to protest simply because the judge refused to dismiss the case...well, that is hysteria.

theProdigal

[Mandate My Ass]

12. I do have faith in the jury system

They were already tried and acquitted.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

15. apparently not for the crimes for which they are charged

you can scream double-jeopardy all you like, but without sufficient cause a grand jury would not have indicted them on these charges. If this gets to trial, they will either be convicted or acquitted of THESE charges...not the state charges which are, as I am sure you know, separate.

theProdigal

[Streetdoc270]

14. technically....

Blood is considered a Hazardous Material. I believe in peaceful protest but it looks to me like these people crossed the line when the went into the office and became destructive.

[H2O Man]

5. Martin Luther King, Jr answered this

question for Americans. We must protest this war, even if it means filling the jails. In fact, especially if it means filling the jails.

[SmokingJacket]

7. This case is happening in my neck of the woods...

...and it's completely absurd. These people threw some blood at a recruiting station -- hurt no one, didn't incite riots, nothing happened at all. They're being made an example of.

The same district attorney who pushed this case into the federal courts is also the one who refused to prosecute an SUV driver who ran down a woman in a crosswalk, dragging her and killing her, and then kept driving and went shopping at Home Depot. He got off with a $200 fine.

Hello -- who's more dangerous here??

Scary stuff.

:scared:

[ObaMania]

9. Hmmm..

"..an SUV driver who ran down a woman in a crosswalk, dragging her and killing her, and then kept driving and went shopping at Home Depot. He got off with a $200 fine.

Hello -- who's more dangerous here??"

I guess it times like those where the W sticker in the SUV window comes in handy.

[Tsiyu]

13. WTF?

Strange times we live in.