Wow. This is America today. A man in a robe declared it legal for cops to stop anyone from doing whatever is not wanted on government property, including a ban on silently dancing at the Jefferson Memorial in DC. Today a dancing protest occurred and was violently broken up by police. Cameras were also banned. Video:
Recent Forum Posts
- Victim's come in all shapes and sizes: Robert L. Lamontagne's wrongful conviction April 2, 2025 penguin
- Robert L. Lamontagne vs. The State of New Hampshire: I've Appeared March 31, 2025 system
- A new American civil war March 31, 2025 Leif_Alexander
- Please, Show Some Decency March 21, 2025 system
- Demand Letter to Keene Police RE: 91-A Compliance March 17, 2025 system
Other Cool Sites
What part of government property do freehippies not understand?
Government:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/government
Property:
http://dlctionary.reference.com/browse/property
You're absolutely right, NGDGT. When the body movements of individuals are outlawed, those who are paid to enforce that law via involuntary monetary confiscation should meet such lawbreakers with body slams, arm-twisting, knees in the neck, and other methods of violence and then not only cage those people but also confiscate more of their wealth to send the message home.
I fear to imagine what such behavior might lead to otherwise.
Those were not 'body movements of individuals', those were deliberate violations of the no dancing law. You can claim it was random movements or timed walking and all sorts of things, everyone knows they were dancing. If your argument is based on a lie you'll never get far.
If freedom in the US starts eroding it will likely be solely because idiots like the ones in this video use their freedom to deliberately be a thorn in the side of civilized society.
NGDT you seriously defend the actions of the police? People dance and get treated violently? Do you not see anything wrong with that? In what world can that in any way be considered acceptable? "Cannot protest" on government property? Wtf is the 1st Amendment about?
I bet if an Islamic activist wanted to chant and burn a flag it would be ok!
It's worse than I imagined. This deviant form of behavior is spreading like wildfire. I present this example of how quickly such a heinous crime can infect the world like a plague:
http://is.gd/Uu5gzM
No one is safe!
John: Dancing = flag burning jihadist? It's definitely an imaginative strawman but I'm not sure it'll catch on.
There's a crucial difference between regular members of society and these freehippie activists that one has to recognize. Regular members of society go about doing what they want to, and having fun, and enjoying the civilized society we have here in America. Now if a regular member of society did this and got treated that way I would be against it too. Freehippies like the ones you saw in the video are not regular members of society, they were not dancing because they wanted to dance, they were dancing because they knew it was not allowed. Now whether it's intentional,… Read more »
Those were not ‘body movements of individuals’, those were deliberate violations of the no dancing law. You can claim it was random movements or timed walking and all sorts of things, everyone knows they were dancing. If your argument is based on a lie you’ll never get far. Sorry about the confusion there, pal. I hereby amend my post to "deliberate body movements of individuals". I agree with you that they clearly *were* indeed dancing. What kind of torture do you recommend as punishment? Anything electrical is my fave for obvious reasons. If freedom in the US starts eroding it… Read more »
Sure, absolute freedom may have eroded long time ago, but liberty is not absolute freedom, liberty is an appropriate amount freedom. Yet another crucial difference freehippies either cannot understand or pretend not to understand.
NGDGT: Freehippies like the ones you saw in the video are not regular members of society, they were not dancing because they wanted to dance, they were dancing because they knew it was not allowed. Right, they should know better. When a man they don't know wears a black gown and rules that someone can't do something, that ruling should be obeyed without question. That's the American way, damn it. Love it or leave it. Now whether it’s intentional, or whether it’s just a byproduct of their desire to fight the law at every turn, freehippies always end up degrading… Read more »
Not being able to dance at a memorial dedicated to someone who fought for freedom. Being tackled and suffering bodily harm for doing so. This is an appropriate amount of freedom?
Now THIS is an appropriate amount of freedom AND a perfect tribute to the memory of Thomas Jefferson.
The rules weren't "made up to control their bodies", the rules were made to prevent the tragedy of the commons. Yet another simple concept freehippies either don't understand or refuse to acknowledge. "Obey authority or else you get a boot on your neck. Period." Again, this is simply not the case. It has nothing to do with obeying, although it can be simplified into an 'obey or else' situation for the ones that are to dim to understand the wisdom behind the rules. Kinda like when a parent says 'because I said so' when there's no time to explain or… Read more »
THIS is the type of oppression I think requires attention, and should be highlighted–real, unfair, disproportionate responses from people in positions of power. To compare this with another situation, the Drinking Game from last summer: both 'exercises of freedom' are arguably as inconsequential (dancing at the Jefferson Memorial vs drinking near-beer at a city council meeting) but the differences in responses from authorities are incredibly obvious. I think these videos will help show people some of the REAL power complexes that exist in the system. I believe the general public is more apt to sympathize with this type of defense-of-freedom… Read more »
Also, if anyone's interested, this is the number to file a formal complaint at U.S. Park Police, DC Branch Office: 202-610-7500
And apparently they actually do count the number of calls they get.
NGDGT Your an idiot, Adam Kokesh served in Iraq – so he is a hippie? He bobbed his head in front of an officer, after keeping you "free" by doing his "american duty" and you are calling him a hippie. Wasn't he in Iraq "fighting" for "freedom"
You, sir, are a sheep.
What! The! Fuck!
The rules weren’t “made up to control their bodies”, the rules were made to prevent the tragedy of the commons. Yet another simple concept freehippies either don’t understand or refuse to acknowledge. Your statement is illogical nonsense. First: All rules are made up to control the behavior of other people. The majority of laws, however, overreach by either prohibiting what peaceful people do with their own bodies and property OR are declarations by the government regarding what they are allowing themselves to do with other people's bodies or property. Murder, assault, rape, theft, slavery, trespass, kidnap, and vandalism all have… Read more »
Yeah, I'm sure Kokesh went to Iraq to fight for my freedom /sarcasm.
You freehippies need to get your act together, depending on what suits the situation the war alternates between being a sham and being a fight for freedom. Why don't you all huddle up in your little freehippie HQ, talk about it, decide whether it's a sham or a legitimate war, and then let us know what you're going with.
"First: All rules are made up to control the behavior of other people." How would you go about qualifying this statement? One might argue that behavior control is only the manifestation, and not the intention. "Murder, assault, rape, theft, slavery, trespass, kidnap, and vandalism all have victims and are real crimes." Dancing around in the memorial has a real victim too, the sanctity of the memorial is the victim here, and people who visit expecting the appropriate atmosphere are victims too. Now if you disagree with this, there are some possibilities. 1) The sanctity argument is nonsense and there is… Read more »
Would any non-violent actions or behavior at the Memorial be OK? In a statist or stateless society, there are, would be, or should be rules concerning use of property that is open to the public. For better or worse, at the present time the government owns (or controls) the Jeff. Monument. In that context, I have no objection to them setting rules for its use. That being said, the dancing in question was not reducing any other patron's ability to visit and enjoy the monument. So the police action in question was unwarranted. The mantras of men in robes, men… Read more »
NGDGT – your posts have so much thought put into them (from you at least) that it really makes me wonder at the caliber of your person. So assuming you are saying about Adam Kokesh is also your feeling towards every person that went to Iraq – because to set just him aside and let you place judgment on his reasoning would be absurd am I correct? You are an idiot. A Sheople. Thank god for people like Adam Kokesh, the founding fathers, Ron Paul, and true freedom fighters. Because if people like you felt that it was okay for… Read more »
HAHA NGDGT I just read your statement that its the government that prints the money.
You have now just proven that you have NO IDEA what is going on in this world or government. Everything you have said from before and up till now is obviously you pretending to understand. Please do your homework and see who prints the monies of the US.
I am sorry but I see the behavior of the "dancers" deliberately disrespectful. If you yell in a library you know you are breaking a rule. If you smoke on an airplane you know you are breaking a rule, if you cross the street against a red light in the city you know you are breaking the rule you should expect to get reprimanded. If you plan these actions out with a group to "protest" a rule you find "unfair" and have others pulling you away from an officer as he is arresting you, then expect you will be treated… Read more »
Joanne, I agree with you, but I don't think the activists thought they weren't breaking any rules. I even agree with the notion that they should expect repercussions from the authorities, seeing as they are aware they are breaking the rules. Respect for the rules is one thing, how people are treated when they choose not to respect those rules (for whatever reason) is another. The force used by the authorities for this type of situation was clearly unwarranted. I think (or at least I hope) that *this* is what the activists were truly trying to highlight. They weren't necessarily… Read more »
I see this as a SNL skit Unfortunately its real…but it could be one but with a underlying theme of real rights being taken away
*
Hey i just thought of something on robins profile …This give new meaning to (paraphrasing) "if i cant dance i dont want to be part of your revolution
I think it is very much the same as the drinking games:over reaction and severity to small petty stuff…like dylan said "pettiness which plays so rough" http://www.timsah.com/Bob-Dylan-Its-Alright-Ma-Im…
david, I disagree that the reaction to the drinking games was an overreaction. The fact of the matter is, in both cases the activists were aware they were breaking the rules, so it would be naïve to expect no repercussions. I thought the drinking games were handled very reasonably. The same cannot be said for this situation. As I mentioned earlier, in the drinking game, the activists were the ones who ended up looking bad because they were the ones making a huge, unnecessary fuss–playing a drinking game during a meeting is never a mature or appropriate thing to do–while… Read more »
Verizon Wireless already put out a commercial about dancing in public and flash mobs. I was surprised to see that less than 24 hours later.
How would you go about qualifying this statement? One might argue that behavior control is only the manifestation, and not the intention. There is no need to qualify it, the definitions for rule and law can be looked up online and, if one knows how to see through the propaganda for what it is, it becomes apparent. The intent was, perhaps at one time, for a community to to control the behavior of its members for the good of all. Now it is for an elite minority to control the majority (member or not) for parasitic purposes and domination. Dancing… Read more »
holy_canole: It's been a long time since I've read your posts on this board. You seem to be quite a bit more understanding and empathetic to what activists are doing and why they are doing it. That said, however, I don't think you're quite there just yet. You seem to use the phrase "the authorities" a lot and you mention "breaking the rules" and "respect for the rules" in one of your posts above. I think that one of the primary purposes of civil disobedience is to get people to question just who these authorities are, what legitimately gives them… Read more »
Zeus, "It’s been a long time since I’ve read your posts on this board. You seem to be quite a bit more understanding and empathetic to what activists are doing and why they are doing it." I've always said that there are social issues which certainly need to be addressed through activism. The reason you may think I was previously less empathetic is because the issues which most Free Keene activists choose to address aren't ones which I find to be pertinent, and I don't think their actions are usually reflective of the severity (or lack thereof) of the situation.… Read more »
David, This was such a good discussion. Why did you feel the need to talk?
@bill,
It's nice to know i was missed
Better missed than tolerated.
"if one knows how to see through the propaganda for what it is, it becomes apparent. " Arguments from obviousness are not acceptable. "Only live human beings can be victims" I disagree with this. Animals can be victims of animal cruelty, dog fighting and such. I also believe there are intangible elements that can be victims. For example the dignity of a grave. Say there's a grave site, and a few degenerates decide that it's a good place to have a party. So they go there and listen to music and get drunk and piss all over the place and… Read more »
Yes there is no question that they knew they were breaking rules. It was planned out and they were incredibly disrespectful to the authorities and deserved exactly the treatment the got. If you get pulled over for a traffic ticket and treat and officer they way they were, and asked to stop and continued by getting in the officers face and challenging him on the speed limit, you should abosolutely expect the ticket and if you refused to accept that ticket and got in your car and deliberately committed the same exact traffic violation infront of the same exact officer,… Read more »
I just watched this again to see what people are talking about saying that the police used too much force. Where? When? The worst force they used was when they tried to arrest one guy and his friend was pulling him away from the arresting officer by the arm there by forcing the officer to pull him by the other arm and take him to the floor in order to secure both wrists for cuffing. Then they guy begins to whine about his shoulder while the cops were putting cuffs on him. He should take issue with his friend for… Read more »
NGDGT: I also believe there are intangible elements that can be victims. For example the dignity of a grave. Say there’s a grave site, and a few degenerates decide that it’s a good place to have a party. So they go there and listen to music and get drunk and piss all over the place and leave. One might say that the only victims are the people that have to clean up after them, but I believe that the dignity of the grave site is also a victim. I find this line of thinking absurd. You're anthropomorphizing mental concepts that… Read more »
The owner of the grave site is dead. If the cemetery belongs to someone else then there is no damage to it at all, once it's cleaned up. It's not just the buyer of a forgery that is a victim, the original piece itself is also a victim. Lot of its value comes from it being the only one, when there's a thousand copies and no one knows which is the real one it loses that value. It had value, through no fault of its own it now has none. I call that victimization. Quality of music is not entirely… Read more »
@ng,
You are fighting against the people fighting against the encroachment of big government ;big government that is trying to take away your rights.
Isn't that shooting yourself in the foot?
Do you feel that government shouldn't be lessened?
And if you DO feel government should be lessened,what are YOU doing ,besides tearing down those that are trying;what are YOU doing to make government smaller?
Or are you a sideline heckler with half knowledge, yelling : like a person at the football game yelling at the players ; who are actually playing and are professionals.
Let's assume for this moment that I do believe the government is too big. That doesn't automatically mean that I have to support the freehippies. When something gets too big and needs to be cut down, you need to decide what to cut first. If your tree in the backyard is blocking the sunlight and you want sunlight, you need to cut the branches that are blocking the light. If you pull out your chainsaw and go wild with it you'll be left with a useless piece of wood sticking out the ground. So no, even if it is the… Read more »
Damn crackhead-killing dancers!
@ng,
so you ARE a "sideline heckler with half knowledge, yelling : like a person at the football game yelling at the players ; who are actually playing and are professionals."
The owner of the grave site is dead. If the cemetery belongs to someone else then there is no damage to it at all, once it’s cleaned up. Who's going to pay for the clean up? The urinating degenerates. Who are they going to pay? The grave? Will throwing a wad of cash at the grave resolve the problem? No. They'll pay the damaged party i.e. the owner of the grave. It’s not just the buyer of a forgery that is a victim, the original piece itself is also a victim. Lot of its value comes from it being the… Read more »
Forget the clean up ,I know the person who pays for the clean up is a victim. But I'm saying that the sanctity of the grave was also violated. It doesn't matter what subjective tastes you have in music, Beethoven has survived 250 years, limp bizkt won't even last 50. If Beethoven invariably keeps matching up with people's 'subjective' tastes in music it isn't subjective. Subjectivity implies the ability to change, limp bizkit's popularity has almost vanished in 10 years, Beethoven's popularity still exists after 250. "The Inflation we are seeing today is due to the Federal Reserve increasing the… Read more »
Forget the clean up ,I know the person who pays for the clean up is a victim. But I’m saying that the sanctity of the grave was also violated. Yes, you've made that quite clear whereas I've been saying that the sanctity of ownership trumps whatever some stranger thinks about someone else's property. If you respect the property rights of others, you respect however they feel about their property. It doesn’t matter what subjective tastes you have in music, Beethoven has survived 250 years, limp bizkt won’t even last 50. If Beethoven invariably keeps matching up with people’s ‘subjective’ tastes… Read more »
“I have no idea why you think this is relevant ” It’s relevant to the argument that there is indeed an objective qualitative difference Beethoven and Limp bizkit. http://news.goldseek.com/LewRockwell/1238979600.php What’s this supposed to be? “What is sanctified or solemn or beautiful to one person is not to others and therefore is subjective and illusory. ” Subjective does not equal illusory. When one says beauty is subjective it means whether or not something is beautiful depends on the observer. If one were to say beauty is illusory, that would mean that when an observer finds something to be beautiful that observer… Read more »