rigorousintuition.ca

Multiple people get roughed up and arrested for dancing in the Jefferson Memorial.

Way to go, Amerika!

May 17, 2011


Appeals Court: No Dancing Allowed at Jefferson Memorial
A federal appeals court in Washington today said expressive dancing is prohibited inside the Jefferson Memorial in a decision that upheld the dismissal of a suit alleging government suppression of First Amendment rights.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said expressive dancing “falls into the spectrum” of prohibited activities—including demonstrations, picketing and speechmaking—at the memorial. The rules, the court said, ban conduct that has the “propensity” to draw onlookers. The court's ruling is here.

The plaintiff, Mary Brooke Oberwetter, who was arrested with other dancers in April 2008, said federal regulations that govern the use of the memorial do not prohibit silent dance. Oberwetter and fellow dancers said they was honoring Jefferson on the eve of his 265th birthday when the authorities interrupted. Police said Oberwetter twice refused to stop dancing.

“Although silent, Oberwetter’s dancing was a conspicuous expressive act with a propensity to draw onlookers,” Judge Thomas Griffith wrote for the appeals court. Judges Judith Rogers and David Tatel joined the opinion.

That the dance happened near midnight on a weekend--making it less likely a crowd would form--does not make it lawful, the court said.

Oberwetter’s conduct, the court said, is prohibited “because it stands out as a type of performance, creating its own center of attention and distracting from the atmosphere of solemn commemoration” the regulations are intended to preserve.

"Outside the Jefferson Memorial, of course, Oberwetter and her friends have always been free to dance to their hearts’ content," Griffith said.

In a footnote, Griffith said in the court's ruling that Jefferson is “on record discouraging the celebration of his birthday.” The judge quoted Jefferson saying the only birthday he ever commemorates is the Fourth of July.

Oberwetter’s lawyer, Alan Gura of Alexandria, Va.’s Gura & Possessky, called the appeals court decision a disappointment and said he is reviewing options. Assistant U.S. Attorney Harry Roback argued for the U.S. Park Police.

http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2011/ ... orial.html


link to court ruling:
http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/o ... 308285.pdf

Your use of "Jeff" confused me. But public dancing is a shameful and awful activity, down with it.

One would think we were running a technocratic religion based upon exploitation of all and our overlords demanded piety. Oh, wait. That's exactly what this is! Ah, the little steps of authority when they know they can't go whole hog and upset their well-laid plans. I feel bad for the powerful people and their apparatuses of control. So threatened must they feel by the dancing going on in their marble occult shrines.

Man, those were some shitty cops...dumbfucks. Do they even train officers anymore?

Wombaticus Rex wrote:Man, those were some shitty cops...dumbfucks. Do they even train officers anymore?

I think they are parks department cops and yes they were a bit clumsy and obviously used as much force as they thought they could reasonably get away with.

I have to say though that after reading the appeals court ruling I don't find anything particularly objectionable in it, except perhaps the snide inclusion of the Jefferson quote about celebrating his birthday. It's pretty reasonable.

In fact, I'm not so far from thinking that the dancers, while perhaps well intentioned, were wasting their time. They can dance all they want, directly outside the memorial, so long as they are less than 25 individuals. More than that and they need a permit. What was their point?

brainpanhandler wrote:

Wombaticus Rex wrote:Man, those were some shitty cops...dumbfucks. Do they even train officers anymore?

I think they are parks department cops and yes they were a bit clumsy and obviously used as much force as they thought they could reasonably get away with.

I have to say though that after reading the appeals court ruling I don't find anything particularly objectionable in it, except perhaps the snide inclusion of the Jefferson quote about celebrating his birthday. It's pretty reasonable.

In fact, I'm not so far from thinking that the dancers, while perhaps well intentioned, were wasting their time. They can dance all they want, directly outside the memorial, so long as they are less than 25 individuals. More than that and they need a permit. What was their point?

You're serious, aren't you ...

OK. I've watched it again. But who the fuck was the cameraman? Why so calm? Why so like, not saying "Jesus, can you believe what I am catching here?" type shit? Why wasn't he or she getting sweated by these fascist retards? This is MetaFascism 2.0. My RI senses say this is a psyop intended to go viral to show what will be happening everywhere soon. It's a shot across the bow of information dispersal. This is saying that "freedom of speech" is now dead. It's an announcement done in the only way you can do anything anymore -- by going viral. I just don't know about anything anymore. . .

In other words, this is a double bind, live, in your face and yet not. This video is meant to do two things at once both of them conflicting. This is the very definition of how fascism is. But this is meta. Call it a quadruple bind.

Funny, I was just thinking about this and was wondering the same thing -- why didn't they arrest the camera person? They don't even acknowledge him/her as far as I can remember. I mean, they arrested everybody else who said anything, even those who weren't dancing but just watching.

Most probably they wanted this to be seen and to go viral. Jefferson Memorial? Hello? Jesus, would the idiotic but lovable public start getting a clue? All forms of getting fucked with should be illegal. But then you get into the metaness of it. In a meta world it's impossible to prove your innocence. You are simply at the mercy of the authorities who do the bidding of the "elites".

THIS is a problem:


A caged- area designated for organized protests appears enclosed by mesh and
chain link fencing near the site of the upcoming Democratic National Convention,
in Boston, Wednesday, July 21, 2004.' (AP Photo/Steven Senne)


It is not unreasonable for the state to limit the types of activities that are allowed on state owned property that is designated for the use of the general public. The dancers, while well intentioned, are inadvertently trivializing the erosion of our first amendment rights by staging this stunt.

brainpanhandler wrote:THIS is a problem:


A caged- area designated for organized protests appears enclosed by mesh and
chain link fencing near the site of the upcoming Democratic National Convention,
in Boston, Wednesday, July 21, 2004.' (AP Photo/Steven Senne)


It is not unreasonable for the state to limit the types of activities that are allowed on state owned property that is designated for the use of the general public. The dancers, while well intentioned, are inadvertently trivializing the erosion of our first amendment rights by staging this stunt.

That was a problem. It's been dealt with. As you can see, that is from 2004. Now it's on to the next step in the fascist handbook. Shell game, BPH, the pea, try and keep your eye on it. You can't. That's the point.

82_28 wrote:OK. I've watched it again. But who the fuck was the cameraman? Why so calm? Why so like, not saying "Jesus, can you believe what I am catching here?" type shit? Why wasn't he or she getting sweated by these fascist retards?

The cameramen - there were several - were clearly there at the request of Adam Kokesh, and they were not surprised because everyone knew they were going to be arrested. That's why they went there, to be arrested for dancing, and to film the incident. Virtually everyone in the video has a camera, not just the activists.

Uh, I noticed obviously the other camera people and I realize it was a stunt. Now answer why the camera people were not arrested or hassled as well. Just answer it. The cops, if they were gonna go that far with effluvia as far as citizens are concerned and be taped by fucking all manner of filmers, wouldn't they be a little upset about that act of the citizenry having done so and thus acted in accordance?