On legacy php5 environment...
imc indymedia

Los Angeles Indymedia : Activist News

white themeblack themered themetheme help
About Us Contact Us Calendar Publish RSS
Features
latest news
best of news
syndication
commentary


KILLRADIO

VozMob

ABCF LA

A-Infos Radio

Indymedia On Air

Dope-X-Resistance-LA List

LAAMN List




IMC Network:

Original Cities

www.indymedia.org africa: ambazonia canarias estrecho / madiaq kenya nigeria south africa canada: hamilton london, ontario maritimes montreal ontario ottawa quebec thunder bay vancouver victoria windsor winnipeg east asia: burma jakarta japan korea manila qc europe: abruzzo alacant andorra antwerpen armenia athens austria barcelona belarus belgium belgrade bristol brussels bulgaria calabria croatia cyprus emilia-romagna estrecho / madiaq euskal herria galiza germany grenoble hungary ireland istanbul italy la plana liege liguria lille linksunten lombardia london madrid malta marseille nantes napoli netherlands nice northern england norway oost-vlaanderen paris/Île-de-france patras piemonte poland portugal roma romania russia saint-petersburg scotland sverige switzerland thessaloniki torun toscana toulouse ukraine united kingdom valencia latin america: argentina bolivia chiapas chile chile sur cmi brasil colombia ecuador mexico peru puerto rico qollasuyu rosario santiago tijuana uruguay valparaiso venezuela venezuela oceania: adelaide aotearoa brisbane burma darwin jakarta manila melbourne perth qc sydney south asia: india mumbai united states: arizona arkansas asheville atlanta austin baltimore big muddy binghamton boston buffalo charlottesville chicago cleveland colorado columbus dc hawaii houston hudson mohawk kansas city la madison maine miami michigan milwaukee minneapolis/st. paul new hampshire new jersey new mexico new orleans north carolina north texas nyc oklahoma philadelphia pittsburgh portland richmond rochester rogue valley saint louis san diego san francisco san francisco bay area santa barbara santa cruz, ca sarasota seattle tampa bay tennessee urbana-champaign vermont western mass worcester west asia: armenia beirut israel palestine process: fbi/legal updates mailing lists process & imc docs tech volunteer projects: print radio satellite tv video regions: oceania united states topics: biotech

Surviving Cities

www.indymedia.org africa: canada: quebec east asia: japan europe: athens barcelona belgium bristol brussels cyprus germany grenoble ireland istanbul lille linksunten nantes netherlands norway portugal united kingdom latin america: argentina cmi brasil rosario oceania: aotearoa united states: austin big muddy binghamton boston chicago columbus la michigan nyc portland rochester saint louis san diego san francisco bay area santa cruz, ca tennessee urbana-champaign worcester west asia: palestine process: fbi/legal updates process & imc docs projects: radio satellite tv
printable version - js reader version - view hidden posts - tags and related articles


View article without comments

Call in to the City of BP

by Read the 1st amendment. Saturday, Jun. 18, 2005 at 10:41 PM

Call the city. urge them to repeal the permit to protest law.

Mayor Manuel Lozano


626-813-5201
Councilmember William (Bill) Van Cleave


626-813-5201
Councilmember David Olivas


626-813-5201
Mayor Pro Tem Ricardo Pacheco


626-813-5201
Councilmember Marlen Garcia


626-813-5201
Stephanie Scher, City Attorney


626-813-5201
Sid Mousavi, Interim CEO


626-813-5204
Chief Mark Kling, Baldwin Park Police Department


626-960-1955

Regardless of your politics. No one should support this resolution. The City should repeal the resolution immediately to avoid legal action.

Whatever resolution they make, no local law can override the right to free speech and the right to peaceable assembly as stated in the 1st amendment of the Bill of Rights. To require a person or a group to get a permit to exercise their constitutional rights is unlawful. The City of BP has made a big mistake.

For reference:

US Bill of Rights, Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

This is not a left vs right issue. This is a free speech issue. Free speech is a basic human right. Both sides should see this. This new law hurts everyone.
I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it




Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Public Safety

by Observer Saturday, Jun. 18, 2005 at 11:03 PM

Hate speech meant to incite vioence is what it's about,not "free speech under the constitution." If the city of Baldwin Park has a reasonable expectation that the SOS rally is a threat to public safety by the SOS tactic of trying to incite violence among its opponents or trying to invade and intimidate the local community;or draining the resources needed elsewhere to protect public safety;
the city has every right to deny a permit or seek an injunction against SOS.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Have you read the Bill of Rights?

by Read the 1st amendment Saturday, Jun. 18, 2005 at 11:33 PM

Public safety is not maintained by suspending civil rights. Thats what the Pat. Act does. You dont support the Pat. Act do you?

The permit applies to everyone, not just the people you dont like. This city law is a violation of the 1st amendment, the City has no right to abridge free speech and the right to peacefully assemble.

They dont need this law to keep the peace there are already laws for disturbing the peace. Yes, hate speech is an abuse of free speech. And yes, SOS-MM are clearly racist, but if SOS-MM lose their right to free speech, so do you.

Those who trade their rights for security, lose both

FYI:

US Bill of Rights, Amendment I

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. "

Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Comment

by 1Planet1People Saturday, Jun. 18, 2005 at 11:52 PM

It is funny how when injustice is caused on the side of the anti-racists, SOS supports that injustice and says that it serves us right. It is funny how they have no problems with police falsely arresting people, and with the oppression of Mexicans in "Whitesville", but when they enter into an area where the roles are reversed, and the injustice is against them, they make a big deal about it. How does it feel to be the alien for once? If you do not get it repealed, then you will know how it feels to be the "undocumented" alien.

Sorry, had to say it....

That aside, permits are not that uncommon, and this ploy has been used countless times against all kinds of people. I agree that this is a problem, as it likely will be used against anti-war, police brutality, and all other types of grass roots organizing. Where they have crossed the line (which has been done in almost every place the G8, IMF, and WTO has gone) is that they require a permit for people who are peacefully assembling on the sidewalk. This is not good politics. That aside, it does seem like a good tactic to fight the economic terrorists that plan on draining BP dry. BP will deny SOSs permits, or make them pay for the police used to defend them. It will begin to cost SOS thousands of dollars to go there. Anyway, just my two cents. I will call and ask BP to repeal the act. Thats the difference between your group and I, I stand up for what is right, and even if it means that I stand up for them. It won't work though; their people went to far when they started threatening the individuals in power. I read Joe's comments about McCain on his website. The SOS people are not that bright, and are walking into a real shit storm.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Please re-read my postings

by Read the 1st amendment Sunday, Jun. 19, 2005 at 12:44 AM

I want to be clear about this: I oppose SOS-MM and their racism.
But not at the expense of free speech and the right to assemble peacefully.
We cant applaud the state because one of their stupid laws falls in our favor for just one day. That same law will be used against us too the next day.

I oppose the application for a permit to protest in any city and any state. Why? Because if you have to ask for the right to protest you have already lost it.

What next? Im sorry the revolution is canceled because we could not get a permit. :-)

Look at Bolivia do they ask for a permit to protest?
Did Che apply for a permit?
How about the French Revolution no one said We can not storm the Bastille today because we dont have a permit. ; -)

See my point?

The permits are another instrument of the state designed to obstruct revolutionary change. None of the authentic protests of the anti-war movement or global justice movement were done with a permit.

Permits sanitize protest and render it ineffective. Protest is about doing something thats not allowed. Right? Otherwise its not a protest. Right? The state does not want you to protest. Right? Thats why they attacked us in Garden Grove. And at DNC-2000, and the RNC-2004 and in Miami 04.

I hope you see my point.

Free speech for all, (even if we dont like what they have say)
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


I love it, just love it!

by littlebopeep Sunday, Jun. 19, 2005 at 1:17 AM

I just love all the "cops attacked us , and we were not doing anything!". What part of being arrested for throwing junk at the cops do you all not understand >?

Well, the permit thing is designed to keep SOS out of BP. They will only issue SOS a permit in the future if SOS rips them with an attorney.

Also, I think it is an attempt to recover any moeny spent the day of a protest, kind of like a parade permit.

One thing is for sure, they are trying hard to cut future loses. Everytime 300 of your goons show up, BP will have to shell out huge doughage to cover policing you brutes!
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


arrests

by 1Planet1People Sunday, Jun. 19, 2005 at 1:21 AM

I just love all the "cops attacked us , and we were not doing anything!". What part of being arrested for throwing junk at the cops do you all not understand >?

------------------------

What part of, "I was standing three feet from one of those arrested, and he didn't throw anything, and I have the video to prove it" do YOU not understand?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Please DON'T call Baldwin Park!

by Fredric L. Rice Sunday, Jun. 19, 2005 at 10:51 PM
frice@skeptictank.org

The rule isn't a law but aside from that, it's designed to protect the anti-hate counter protesters' health and safety and the requirement is _reasonable_.

The poor City of Baldwin Park already have these "Save Our State" a.k.a. "Minutemen" white supremist mother fuckers calling them and emailing them with terrorist death threats; they don't need anti-hate activists calling them making stupid demands for the removal of a rule that is an attempt to _protect_ them from the white supremists.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Fred

by 1Planet1People Sunday, Jun. 19, 2005 at 11:13 PM

I think we agree on almost everything, but my only concern here is that this rule will be used against us in other situations. Too often the powers that be will create rules/laws with the popular support, then use them against the popular people (Patriot Act for example). I believe we should not tolerate any freedom of assembling. I even stand up for the KKK's right to organize, and if you know anything about me, you know I am not a KKK supporter. The people will oppose, we don't need more government restrictions.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


correction

by 1Planet1People Sunday, Jun. 19, 2005 at 11:48 PM

Correction: We should not tolerate any "restriction" on the freedom to assemble.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


© 2000-2018 Los Angeles Independent Media Center. Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by the Los Angeles Independent Media Center. Running sf-active v0.9.4 Disclaimer | Privacy