This week’s AKPF #1 timeslot has the unique opportunity of being filled with a special edition aftershow of Black Sheep Rising, in which the deeper meanings of the hollywood production “Jumper” are crucially analyzed. In this installment, which runs slightly longer than the standard 29 minute blocks, the audience is treated to illustrated excerpts from the controversial late night television program, censored for presentation to the daytime audience of Cheshire TV.
To what institutions in society does the jumping scenario present an analogous interpretation? Is Samuel L. Jackson’s role that of an enforcer, an elder, a spiritual leader, or a tyrant? Should jumping ever be prohibited by law? Was Vincent Vega truly responsible for the incident which traumatically affected the character Marvin in Pulp Fiction? Unanswered questions about how jumping effects the lives of so many are approached with answers in this unforgettable review of Anakin and Mace Windu’s much anticipated rematch.
The city and police bosses continue to make ridiculous choices that lead to more and more national media, hilariously critical of their outrageous acts of repression (BEARCAT, Robin Hood Lawsuits, etc). The latest? Former Daily Show correspondent John Oliver recently made fun of the Keene Police and the BEARCAT attack tank on his show, “Last Week Tonight”. Shire Liberty News has the full story.
The NH ACLU’s attorney, Anthony J. Galdieri argues that the city has no case when they claim Robin Hooders have engaged in “tortious interference”:
In the context of non-violent protests aimed at influencing societal or governmental change, tortious speech is only actionable if it amounts to violent or unlawful conduct. See Claiborne
Hardware Co., 458 U.S. at 917-18 (holding in context of protest that the state may impose
damages only for violent or unlawful conduct, not for non-violent protected activity, even if
that non-violent protected activity causes economic harm).
The NH ACLU also affirms that the city’s proposed restrictions on Robin Hooders are unconstitutional, including a “buffer zone” where speaking to the meter maids would be prohibited, as would be recording them. The proposed restrictions are clear violations of NH Constitution article 8 and 22, which protect the right of people to access a responsive government and protect free speech.
Nor should the city be allowed to handle the Robin Hooders through the courts, says the ACLU: (more…)
After video recording his arraignment for charges of Second-Degree Assault, James Michael Phillips and his posse, including Justin Paquette came across the street and knocked my camera to the ground. Before attacking me and my property, it appears they called the police to the scene. When the police arrived, they investigated the crimes of theft and two assaults.
Here are the raw videos capturing the scene that unfolded. Unfortunately, each video cuts out after the assailants grab the cameras from my hands and threw them on the ground.
With the exciting double parking ticket trial of AKPF #1 co-producer Garret Ean last week, the audience is treated in this episode to the complete and illustrated footage of the court hearing featuring infamous faces of the Keene criminal justice system. Judge Edward Burke hears the case brought forward by KPD prosecutor Jean Kilham, with AKPF agent Jane called upon as the sole witness. In this inquiry, we see how eager to object to anything and everything that the state’s representative is, and Burke also plays a significant role in tipping the hand of the defense on lines of questioning. Ultimately, most arguments are not permitted to be made, and the disproportionate fine of five dollars per offense is levied, though compensated partially in Obamacoin.
It is obvious to everyone in the area that the city of Keene has a problem with people writing and drawing with chalk on the sidewalks of the downtown business district. There have been many suggestions as to how to deal with this scourge, but none as basic, simple and reasonable as the solution I propose. The root of the problem is quite clear: the easy availability of chalk enables anyone to just grab a piece of chalk and, perhaps in a heated moment, or as an act of depraved indifference, to commit acts of drawing or writing that will be rued by all sensible members of society.
No rights are limitless; all we need are reasonable, commonsense city laws controlling the sale and possession of chalk. (more…)