# God Bless America...



## Jason (Mar 5, 2003)

Gotta love this

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=2326548

rights? who needs rights?


----------



## mdnky (Mar 5, 2003)

That makes me absolutely disgusted.  WTH is wrong with this country anymore?  

NO offense to people in or from New York, Califorinia, or Chicago....but those cities are some of the most ignorant places in the world, IMHO.  It never ceseases to amaze me on how scewed up they can make things.  Too much polotics and not enough common-sense.


----------



## Giaguara (Mar 5, 2003)

I guess if I'd be wearing a peace - t-shirt at an airport (in US), I'd get arrested for terrorism...


----------



## Ricky (Mar 5, 2003)

A year in prison for "trespassing?"  Have we finally overflowed into communism?

What did the guy do?


----------



## hazmat (Mar 5, 2003)

> _Originally posted by mdnky _
> *That makes me absolutely disgusted.  WTH is wrong with this country anymore?
> 
> NO offense to people in or from New York, Califorinia, or Chicago....but those cities are some of the most ignorant places in the world, IMHO.  It never ceseases to amaze me on how scewed up they can make things.  Too much polotics and not enough common-sense. *



No offense taken, but I see a little ignorance in your post, unless I am mistaken.  California is not a city, and New York in this case is the state, not the city.  The article specifically says Guilderland (Albany).  That is about three hours north of NYC.


----------



## edX (Mar 5, 2003)

why do i figure he would have been ok with one that said "Kill 'em all and let God sort it out". 

fear and propaganda can do some weird stuff to people. the mall should be sued though. i would say boycotted, but the store that sold him the shirt was obviously ok.


----------



## adambyte (Mar 5, 2003)

The really funky thing is, the STORE is okay to SELL the shirt, but the guy who bought it is not allowed to wear it. There's definitely a fault in the logic, here. 

Butthead corporate America.


----------



## edX (Mar 5, 2003)

i guess we can just be glad they didn't shoot him.


----------



## hazmat (Mar 5, 2003)

> _Originally posted by edX _
> *
> fear and propaganda can do some weird stuff to people. the mall should be sued though. i would say boycotted, but the store that sold him the shirt was obviously ok. *



Absolutely.  I would sue the hell out of that mall.  Incidentally, I went to college at SUNY Albany.  Albany is a horrible city.  No culture at all.  I hate the Crossgates Mall, too.  This really doesn't surprise me all that much.


----------



## toast (Mar 5, 2003)

Pathetic. Utterly pathetic.
But predictable !


----------



## hazmat (Mar 5, 2003)

This is from the local Albany newspaper: http://www.timesunion.com/AspStorie...category=REGION&BCCode=HOME&newsdate=3/5/2003


----------



## twister (Mar 5, 2003)

Who can we write to to express our disgust in this issue?  The mayor, governor, the mall, the courts, who?  Give me email address'! This is unacceptable.  I'm not saying if i'm for or against war but the man was just wearing a t-shirt.  If that shirt was unacceptable wouldn't all printed shirts be unacceptable?

Maybe i need to find a "Give Peace a Chance" t-shirt and wear it to the Mall of America and see what happens.


----------



## Jason (Mar 6, 2003)

if i were up there, i would walk into that mall with a peace shirt and peace pants on, and just wait for them to tell me to remove them, to reveal the peace tatoo on my butt 

stuff like this really should be illegal... but unfortunately in the legal sense, that place is a private place, thus can treat whomever however they want, even if it is against freedom of speech, and peaceful assembly/protest rights


----------



## toast (Mar 6, 2003)

> _Jason_: stuff like this really should be illegal... but unfortunately in the legal sense, that place is a private place, thus can treat whomever however they want, even if it is against freedom of speech, and peaceful assembly/protest rights



Hoepfully, that's false. Depending on how you look at the law (esp. American law), freedom of speech is a right placed over private property. Plus, the article mentions it's a 'public mall', I may have missed something there


----------



## edX (Mar 6, 2003)

i'm guessing they picked the wrong peacelover to make their statement with. i have a feeling he has enough friends (read: Lawyers) inn high places that this mall and those security guards will wish they had kept their politics to themselves.  

of course if we do go to  war, i volunteer these jerks to stand up for their beliefs and be there, instead of harrassing citizens here.


----------



## substrate (Mar 6, 2003)

The mall isn't really public property, it's private property intended for limited public use. The mall's owner gets to define what standards of conduct or apparel are allowed. This is a bit like a lot of bars in areas which have a large gang contingent. You'll often see signs such as: Nobody wearing gang colours or leather jackets allowed on the premises. 

I personally think the mall was stupid for taking the stance that they are taking (though from other readings they're trying to do damage control now: We want the charges dropped) but it is their right to be stupid. I hope that their stupidity ends up putting them in bankruptcy.


----------



## Androo (Mar 6, 2003)

LOL that's like me wearing an apple shirt and getting arrested! He goes to a mall, buys a shirt, wears it, and goes to jail for a year. America is messed up sometimes....


----------



## twister (Mar 6, 2003)

Some newer reports claim that he was trying to influence people by stopping them and talking with them.


----------



## toast (Mar 6, 2003)

> Some newer reports claim that he was trying to influence people by stopping them and talking with them.



Sounds completely stupid and propagandistic. I can hardly imagine an American lawyer stupid enough to turn into a peace proselytist in a public mall, wearing a Peace t-shirt.


----------



## twister (Mar 6, 2003)

Heres what i saw...


----------



## mdnky (Mar 6, 2003)

> _Originally posted by hazmat _
> *No offense taken, but I see a little ignorance in your post, unless I am mistaken.  California is not a city, and New York in this case is the state, not the city.  The article specifically says Guilderland (Albany).  That is about three hours north of NYC. *



Sorry,I was in a hurry when posting...boss was on the floor.   

When I said Cali, I meant the whole state.  As far as New York, mainly the bigger cities (NYC in particular).  It amazes me how anti-American some of these cities/states are in terms of attitudes and policies.


A mall is a public place, even if privately owned.  They have to ban ALL t-shirts then to be legal.  It's a clear violation of the 1st Amendment.  Had they been actively attempting to "protest", maybe there would have been a case there...but passive protest by wearing a shirt isn't enough to warrant what was done.


----------



## Giaguara (Mar 6, 2003)

If I went to a _peecee_ store in THAT mall wearing an Apple t-shirt, would I get arrested?


----------



## Ugg (Mar 6, 2003)

The phenomenon of the gated community is not uniquely American I am sure but its rise in popularity over the last 15 years is extremely scary.  Malls are but one example of this.  It is sort of funny because it is basically what a lot of Americans would consider communist behavior.  IE if I move into a gated community, I can only paint my house a certain color, can't park my boat on the driveway, the curtains in the windows have to be a certain color, I am not allowed to place political signs on my property, etc, etc,.  While I am sure that we would all agree that the aesthetics of the above prohibitions are very good, the fact that we are willingly giving up our freedom of expression in exchange for a perceived sense of security is very scary.  

Is it that way where you are Gia and the rest of you outside North America or are we the only ones?


----------



## fryke (Mar 7, 2003)

Maybe one of the worst things about the whole thing (Bush, USA, Saddam, Iraq, the world) right now is that it polarizes so much and so extremely.

For example, if the US (the regime, not all of its citizens) had chosen to do all of this through the UN instead of using propaganda and media from the very beginning to hype the necessity for this war, maybe they would have been able to clearly define why a strong intervention in Iraq is necessary.

With the banner of a 'war against terrorism' on their back and only 'one way to go' and 'you can be with or against us', there's no room left for people. They've pushed everyone into a decision here. And they didn't think so many people all around the world would choose 'against you'.

I hope that the outcome will urge Bush and consorts to act more wisely in the future.


----------



## toast (Mar 7, 2003)

Perfect quote from fryke:
"I hope that the outcome will urge Bush and consorts to act more wisely in the future."

100% my opinion.


----------



## Jason (Mar 8, 2003)

who was it that said something like

"love your country always, love your government when they deserve it"

anyways i love this saying, i love america for the most part, but damn do the people in charge of it irk me right now....


----------

