A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Greetings from your friendly, neighborhood, TERRORIST!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 29th 04, 06:35 PM
John T
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Paul Tomblin wrote:
In a previous article, "John T" said:
"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message


Funny, I thought this country had a constitution protecting your
right to freedom of speech, and freedom from unreasonable search and
seizure. I guess I was wrong.


To whom was this directed? The police in the story or "the anonymous
coward"?

I wasn't denying the anonymous coward's right to call the site "the
far left frindge(sic) of radical socialists". I was saying that even
if the guy with the web site *was* on "the far left frindge(sic) of
radical socialists" (and if you conclude that that from that
particular blog, then so am I and most of my friends), that doesn't
abrogate his right to take pictures of a tourist attraction without
being threatened by 8 police, including three "federal agents from
Homeland Security".


Nowhere in the "nutball radical socialist's" article did he claim his
freedom of speech was infringed. Neither, in fact, were his Fourth
Amendment protections violated. Further. we only have his side of the
story. Come back with the rest of the story and we'll see if we can find
the real truth together.

In the meantime, I submit that seeing a brown-skinned individual (perhaps
Middle Eastern in appearance) taking photos of a prominent landmark while
making notes is reasonably suspicious. If you'll recall, the reason the
police first showed up to his house was in response to a citizen complaint
and the police report revealed nothing wrong.

Now, the second scenario where the eight officers surrounded him probably
could have been avoided if he'd cooperated with the first guard with the
dog. I wasn't there so I don't know what was the demeanor of either the
officer(s) or the writer/photographer. Until then, and based solely on the
way he wrote the story, I can easily imagine Spiers having a bit of a chip
on his shoulder (that also being understandable even if unwise).

I can just as easily see some of the officers having a bit of an attitude,
so that brings me back to my real point:

Bring me both sides of the story before you expect me to jump on any
bandwagon.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
____________________



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"Friendly fire" Mike Naval Aviation 3 April 6th 04 06:07 PM
"Friendly fire" Mike Military Aviation 0 March 19th 04 02:36 PM
B-52 crew blamed for friendly fire death Paul Hirose Military Aviation 0 March 16th 04 12:49 AM
U.S. won't have to reveal other friendly fire events: Schmidt's lawyers hoped to use other incidents to help their case Otis Willie Military Aviation 0 December 18th 03 08:44 PM
12 Dec 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News Otis Willie Naval Aviation 0 December 12th 03 11:01 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.