Wednesday, September 22, 2004
You Thought We Were Exaggerating Perhaps?
Earlier today I posted a couple of stories about people who are being actively prosecuted for "crimes" as heinous as wearing a Kerry-Edwards button within potential visual range of Dear Leader.
It wasn't until later in the day that I read today's Froomkin, at which point the situation got downright terrifying. He cites the following:
Dissent in public is a Federal crime. Wearing a button is dissent. I want somebody to try the following: Go to a BushCoworship service "rally" dressed like a Mormon missionary. As soon as Dear Leader mounts the stage, turn your back. That's it. Have no disloyal propaganda on your person--just turn your back.
I'll stand your bail, although I can't promise to cover medical expenses.
It wasn't until later in the day that I read today's Froomkin, at which point the situation got downright terrifying. He cites the following:
Jonathan M. Katz writes in Slate that behind the rash of arrests of presidential protesters is "an arcane 1970 Secret Service provision -- Title 18, Section 1752(a)(1)(ii) of the U.S. Code -- which makes it a federal crime to 'knowingly and willfully' enter an area restricted by the Secret Service during a presidential visit. The law was originally drafted by legislators scarred by the assassinations of the 1960s, in the hopes of preventing the next attempt on the life of a president. Turns out the law can be used to prevent criticism as well."Go read Katz' piece, it's short. Of course, "1984" isn't very long either.
Dissent in public is a Federal crime. Wearing a button is dissent. I want somebody to try the following: Go to a BushCo
I'll stand your bail, although I can't promise to cover medical expenses.