All signs are prohibited.

by **nomo** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 5:59 pm

Homeland Security Hassles Owner of Truck with Bumperstickers By Matthew Rothschild February 22, 2006 Dwight Scarbrough used to be in the Navy. He was a machinist on submarines, some of them nuclear, in the Pacific from 1975-1980. Now he heads up the Vets for Peace chapter in Boise, Idaho. And he’s not shy about expressing his opinion. At any given time, he may have as many as ten bumperstickers or peace signs on every conceivable spot of his truck. He usually doesn’t get hassled, he tells me. But then, on February 7, at his day job for a federal natural resource agency, Scarbrough got a call from, of all places, Homeland Security. An official told him to come out to the parking lot and said he was in violation of the Code of Federal Regulations. When Scarbrough came out, he found two armed officers of Homeland Security, who told him he was violating the regulation against the posting of signs on federal property. (Scarbrough, fearing trouble, brought a tape recorder along and taped the entire confrontation. You can read a <a href="http://www.boiseweekly.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A158729">transcript at the Boise Weekly</a>, which broke the story on February 15 in an excellent article by Nicholas Collias.) Scarbrough tried to point out that those signs were not on federal property but on his own private property—his personal truck. And by the way, the signs were really subversive, like “Honor Vets, Wage Peace,” and “Another Veteran Against War with Iraq.” “Sir, you’ve got signs posted on your vehicle. I’m informing you that you’re in violation,” one officer told him, according to the transcript. Scarbrough: “That’s not illegal. That’s not illegal.” When Scarbrough accused them of harassment, they continued to demand that he remove the signs or be cited for a violation. “You know this is BS,” Scarbrough told them. “So any vehicle that comes on with, like a police sign, or with delivery or FedEx or something, that’s not a sign?” To which the officer replied: “All signs are prohibited.” “It’s crap and you know it,” Scarbrough said. Rather than risk getting a citation, and rather than tear the bumperstickers and signs down, Scarbrough moved his truck out of the parking lot. “I was pretty angry about it,” he says. The next day, Scarbrough says he “drove around the parking lot and took pictures of about forty vehicles that had signs of them.” According to Scarbrough, some of the signs said, “My Dad Is a Marine,” and “Support the Troops.” “I wanted to make the point that if they were going to apply the law equally, they were going to have to tell everybody that they had to peel off their signs,” he explains. “This was an obvious attempt to suppress my right to free speech.” Scarbrough contacted the local ACLU, which found him an attorney, Michael Bartlett of the prestigious law firm Nevin, Benjamin, and McKay. “My jaw dropped,” Bartlett says, when he heard what had happened to Scarbrough. “These are the kinds of political statements most protected under our Constitution.” Bartlett has offered to represent Scarbrough pro bono, but there appears to be no need to just yet. Scarbrough has since returned to work, and to the parking lot, with signs and stickers on his truck bumper and doors. And he hasn’t been hassled again. “I suspect nothing will happen,” Bartlett says. “This is such a clear violation of the law he’s probably going to be left alone.” He applauds Scarbrough for piping up, though. “Dwight is a great example of a good American who is not only willing to express his right to free speech but is willing to stand up for it,” Bartlett says. “We should be proud of him for that.” Neither the federal Department of Homeland Security nor the Idaho branch could help clear up what happened. “It’s not anyone I represent,” says Lt. Col. Stephanie Dowling, public affairs officer for the Idaho Military Division, which, she says, “includes the Idaho State Bureau of Homeland Security. We’re the emergency management agency. We do floods, and work with FEMA, and all of that. It certainly wasn’t the Idaho Bureau of Homeland Security.” The press office for the federal Department of Homeland Security did not return phone calls for comment. Back at work, with his adorned truck in the federal parking lot, Scarbrough seems to be doing just fine. “One of my co-workers’ wives made a cake for me with a pick-up truck and signs on it,” he says. “That tells you the sentiment around here.”

by **Floyd Smoots** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 6:10 pm

That's right, nomo. Don't honk off an old ex-Squid. We can get very annoyed about things like that! Right On for ol' Dwight Scarbrough!!! Those Lousy Commie, Verkakte, Nazi S/S Rat Bastids!!!!!!!! <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/mad.gif ALT=">:"> Ex-RM3 Mutter, U.S.N., B22-81-04 (old style serial no.)

by **StarmanSkye** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 7:56 pm

Bloody Fuggin' Hell ... My top jaw-dropping incident for the day (so far.) Imagine -- Our tax bucks are PAYING for those two (and uncounted hundreds, thousands other) armed-and-uniformed Homelandia Securitat officers driving around in a taxpayer-provided SUV hassling folks over Bullshit, clearly politically-motivated re: 'unapproved' messages. This is SO close to the three citizens attending a Bush-speaking town-hall meeting who were evicted by SS agents because their pickup has a 'No War for Oil' bumpersticker. In the above-incident, shouldn't the Homelandia guys face some kind of discipline for abuse of authority or incompetance in misunderstanding the regs -- after all, they weren't applying the 'statute' to everyone else in the parking lot? It just blows me away how eager some folks are to play hardass rule-obsessed stormtroopers -- give 'em a badge and gun and they become self-important nazis with NO sense of perspective and incapable of common-sense or reason. "It's the Law, sir." I confess, I'm a wimp -- I try to avoid such confrontations, and so don't have bumperstickers on any of my vehicles. I keep thinking somebody would key my vehicle or trigger some rightwing zealot kook's aggression. But I DO admire folks like Scarbrough who are self-assured and outspoken and courageous enough to make a strong public statement about their position on controversial issues like the criminal idiocy of Bush Inc's War. --quote-- ""It's starting to look like this is something like a directive from the Department of Homeland Security to suppress opposition to the war," he says. He calls the officers "image control," but Scarbrough's take is even more forceful: "This is a fascist state. At least, it's the beginning of a fascist state." --unquote-- Also deeply troubling and too-common -- the apparant fear of officials to make statements or speak 'on the record' -- everybody is concerned with possible retribution -- In this story (article cited), look how many folks hid behind their job title or didn't facilitate the reporter getting to the bottom of who was responsible. The security officer at the natural Resource Complex questioned by the reporter was afraid to let his name be used as referral for the local HMS office. Since the 2000 Bush-coup, the number of gummint officials hiding behind 'anonymous' or claiming they aren't 'authorized' to say something has become unprecedented -- so much for America as the home of the 'free and the brave' -- another myth-fallacy bites-the-dust. Almost as stupid and thinking-deficient as the notion that US troops are 'defending' America by engaging in illegal wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Starman

by **Floyd Smoots** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 9:52 pm

I could tell some of you younger folks, forty and under, some hair-raising tales of the beginnings of Facism right here in our dear old Homeless-land, that go back to the beginning of the seventies, but for now, I won't bore you with them. I now know that it really began long before I was born, even back to and before, the Civil War, or War Between the States. According to some sites, it actually began before the American Revolution. But enough of that for now. I used to proudly display a Christian "Jesus Fish" on three of my last four automobiles. I, also, "post no bills" on my current model two thousand auto. My reasons are somewhat different from StarmanSkye's, but, also somewhat similar. I no longer sport the "Fish", not out of fear of man, but, because I'm not a "perfect driver" either, and sometimes I get really angry at inconsiderate drivers, and "flip them off", I don't want to defame the name of my Lord. On the political hand, even though I was stupidly "missled" (sic) to vote for the Head Monkey, not just Once, but TWICE, I aver this. I travel every day in moderate-to-heavy commuter traffic which requires several "merges" in order to get to work. I don't want someone to "refuse my merger" simply because they don't like my bumper sticker. I could try to plead "keeping a low profile", and it's true in daily traffic. My lack of "signs" on my vehicle tells no one anything about the political leanings of its driver, not even "The Fuzz" (old hippie term for the Pigs). It's NOT TRUE here on the PTB's WorldWideWeb. They know who I am, and WHAT I think of their evil Nazi, dictatorial, Dick(cheny)-Headed garbage, and that suits my lifestyle (for the nonce) just fine!!! No Low Profile here! One day, I too, just may receive the Handcuff & Pistol-Powered Invitation to "Just shut up and get in the black van/suv. At this point in my life, I just don't even care. I only hope the Lord will just give me a thirty-second "heads up", so I can get to my gun and sent one or two to "Meet the JUDGE", before they get me. And now, like Forrest Gump, that's all I have to say about that........ Shoot First & Don't Even BOTHER With the Questions, Floyd

All signs are prohibited.

All signs are prohibited.

Signs of the Times....

Re: All signs are prohibited.

I Could, But I Won't....

Who is online