[lbo-talk] FBI lawyer weighs in on how to control protest

[// ravi]

On Oct 19, 2011, at 12:00 PM, shag carpet bomb wrote:
> it was just a recitation of the fact that we have a right to free
> speech, but that it is not unlimited, according to every increasingly
> restrictive court rulings,  and that those limitations are justified
> in the interest of keeping the peace and protecting citizens.
> 
> sort of, Yeah yeah, we know that this is a democracy and we know about
> the bill of rights, but here are a bunch of rulings that say that we
> can, in fact, regulate people into "free speech zones" for reasons of
> safety and that the court sez that this isn't a problem because, after
> all, it only infringes on your ability to speak to the general public
> in a certain place and time. Your message can still get out this way
> or that without necessarily causing a traffic jam or requiring that
> streets be closed down. Besides which, we have to worry about Terr
> (tm).
> 
> The end.

Grazie!

	—ravi


> 
>> On Oct 19, 2011, at 10:56 AM, Carrol Cox wrote:
>>> On 10/19/2011 8:49 AM, Thomas Volscho wrote:[clip]
>>> 
>>> Give us a paragraph or two from it. I don't know abut others but I
>>> will not click on a link without more information on what I will
>>> find there.
>>> 
>> 
>> Same here (unless the poster actually intends suspense).
>> 
>> 	—ravi
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___________________________________
>> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> http://cleandraws.com
> Wear Clean Draws
> ('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)
> 
> 
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk