|
Note: This is a Text only archive. Go directly to the real forum.
Reporter Arrested For Asking Questions About Rudy's WTC "Collapse" Foreknowledge
- Click HERE to go to the original thread with graphics
banner
| Reporter Arrested For Asking Questions About Rudy's WTC "Collapse" Foreknowledge
- Click HERE to go to the original thread with graphics
|
| Stickman |
You can disagree with the guy's question, but how can any American support the arrest of someone asking a question?
The guy has legitimate press credentials and CNN did not want him arrested. This is fascism in American, and Rudy is an American Il Duce.
Manchester, NH - Freelance reporter Matt Lepacek, reporting for Infowars.com, was arrested for asking a question to one of Giuliani's staff members in a press conference. The press secretary identified the New York based reporter as having previously asked Giuliani about his prior knowledge of WTC building collapses and ordered New Hampshire state police to arrest him.
Jason Bermas, reporting for Infowars and America: Freedom to Fascism, confirmed Lepacek had official CNN press credentials for the Republican debate. However, his camera was seized by staff members who shut off the camera, according to Luke Rudkowski, also a freelance Infowars reporter on the scene. He said police physically assaulted both reporters after Rudkowski objected that they were official members of the press and that nothing illegal had taken place. Police reportedly damaged the Infowars-owned camera in the process.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOerYpJse30
Reporters were questioning Giuliani staff members on a variety of issues, including his apparent ignorance of the 9/11 Commission Report, according to Bermas. The staff members accused the reporters of Ron Paul partisanship, which press denied. It was at this point that Lepacek, who was streaming a live report, asked a staff member about Giuliani's statement to Peter Jennings that he was told beforehand that the WTC buildings would collapse.
Giuliani's press secretary then called over New Hampshire state police, fingering Lepacek.
Though CNN staff members tried to persuade police not to arrest the accredited reporter-- in violation of the First Amendment, Lepacek was taken to jail. The police station told JonesReport.com that Lepacek is being charged with felony criminal trespass.
Lepacek did receive one phone call in jail which he used to contact reporter Luke Rudkowski. According to Rudkowski, Lepacek was scared because he had been told he may be transferred to a secret detention facility because state police were also considering charges of espionage against him-- due to a webcam Lepacek was using to broadcast live at the event. State police considered it to be a hidden camera, which led to discussion of "espionage."
Wearing a webcam at a press event is not an act of espionage. Alex Jones, who was watching the live feed, witnessed Lepacek announce that he was wearing a camera connected to a laptop that was transmitting the press conference live at approximately 9:20 EST. When Lepacek announced that he was broadcasting live, Giuliani staff members responded by getting upset at his questions and ordering his arrest.
Freedom to Fascism reporter Samuel Ettaro was also dragged out after asking a question on Giuliani's ties with Cintra and Macquerie, two foreign contractors involved with the contentious Trans-Texas Corridor under development in Texas.
The entire incident took place in a large press auditorium, apart from the debate stages where authorized media were able to question candidates and their handlers.
Since when do campaign operatives have the power to order state police to arrest someone on false charges or arbitrate who has the right to conduct journalism, a right guarded by the Constitution?
A warning to the press-- if candidates or police don't like your questions, you could be arrested for trespassing and even espionage in the new Orwellian America.
More on this at:
http://911blogger.com/node/9191 |
|
|
| sternowitz |
| This country is going to hell in a handbasket |
|
|
| Stickman |
Drudge posted this on his front page. Maybe this has some legs.
These guys have steel balls and they don't melt because of some jet fuel. |
|
|
| Oz |
| someone should punch the guy in the suspenders in the face - figuratively of course |
|
|
| Snoopyrules |
| That dumbass wants to have them sit down for 20 minutes in front of his laptop during a post debate spin session. That makes a lot of sense. You conspiracy cult members are so f-ing annoying. That kid should have been knocked on his whiny loon blogger ass. That guy at the ends is the worst..."they were going to arrest me, but I didn't let them do it"....that makes sense. This is crap, the You-tube kid will be home later with his made up detention story and the loons will spin this as more proof... |
|
|
| johnincleveland |
| This is are free country. There isn't a fucking thing free in this country. Free to do what they tell us we can do. |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by Snoopyrules
That dumbass wants to have them sit down for 20 minutes in front of his laptop during a post debate spin session. That makes a lot of sense. You conspiracy cult members are so f-ing annoying. That kid should have been knocked on his whiny loon blogger ass. That guy at the ends is the worst..."they were going to arrest me, but I didn't let them do it"....that makes sense. This is crap, the You-tube kid will be home later with his made up detention story and the loons will spin this as more proof... |
to be fair he said ten minutes after he thought 20 might be too much - ask yourself why Giuliani won't answer the question - :yes: |
|
|
| Snoopyrules |
Quote: Originally posted by Oz
to be fair he said ten minutes after he thought 20 might be too much - ask yourself why Giuliani won't answer the question - :yes: |
Ask yourself what answering the conspiracy loon who pulls a You Tube cameras out his ass accomplishes. The answers are never accepted and anything answer given will just be twisted to further the loon cause. You people have a reputation as being exstremeley creative when it comes to compiling and presenting your idiotic information. No respected politician in their right mind should talk to a conspiracy idiot until they can prove behave fairly. It serves them no purpose, you people have made up your minds and are hell bent on sticking to a repeatively proven ridiculous story. This is usually the part where I rattle off a list of about 30 things that are just not possible for the dumb conpiracy story (i.e. the 1000's of people that woul have been required to plan and flawlessly execute while remaining silent for 6 years, the physical eyewitnesses who watched planes hit the Pentagon, the logistics of pre-wiring explosives during unotices power downs in 2 of the most secure buildings in the world)....but I'm sick of it, and I'm guessing most rational people are as well. Answering you people with facts doesn't seem to work. |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
| They guy questioner has the right to ask his questions, but when it became clear that they were not going to be answered in the manner he would have liked, he was removed. There were other people who were there to ask questions and regardless of their affiliation, they were being denied their right to question the staffer. |
|
|
| johnsonrod |
Quote: Originally posted by Oz
to be fair he said ten minutes after he thought 20 might be too much - ask yourself why Giuliani won't answer the question - :yes: |
Because its about as productive to discuss this shit as it is to talk about the moon landing being faked. |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by Billyfromsphily
They guy questioner has the right to ask his questions, but when it became clear that they were not going to be answered in the manner he would have liked, he was removed. There were other people who were there to ask questions and regardless of their affiliation, they were being denied their right to question the staffer. |
He wasn't "removed" he was arrested, asshole.
Do you have the nuts to admit that it's unconstitutional and un American to arrest someone for asking a question? |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by Snoopyrules
Ask yourself what answering the conspiracy loon who pulls a You Tube cameras out his ass accomplishes. The answers are never accepted and anything answer given will just be twisted to further the loon cause. You people have a reputation as being exstremeley creative when it comes to compiling and presenting your idiotic information. No respected politician in their right mind should talk to a conspiracy idiot until they can prove behave fairly. It serves them no purpose, you people have made up your minds and are hell bent on sticking to a repeatively proven ridiculous story. This is usually the part where I rattle off a list of about 30 things that are just not possible for the dumb conpiracy story (i.e. the 1000's of people that woul have been required to plan and flawlessly execute while remaining silent for 6 years, the physical eyewitnesses who watched planes hit the Pentagon, the logistics of pre-wiring explosives during unotices power downs in 2 of the most secure buildings in the world)....but I'm sick of it, and I'm guessing most rational people are as well. Answering you people with facts doesn't seem to work. |
Like Billy, you fail to see that the guy was arrested for asking a question. |
|
|
| Reed Rothchild |
| I don't care if they want to ask him if he keeps Guatemalan orphans chained up in his basement to fold his shirts; having a reporter arrested for asking questions, no fucking way. Take away his press credential and kick him out if you don't like his questions. |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by Snoopyrules
Ask yourself what answering the conspiracy loon who pulls a You Tube cameras out his ass accomplishes. The answers are never accepted and anything answer given will just be twisted to further the loon cause. You people have a reputation as being exstremeley creative when it comes to compiling and presenting your idiotic information. No respected politician in their right mind should talk to a conspiracy idiot until they can prove behave fairly. It serves them no purpose, you people have made up your minds and are hell bent on sticking to a repeatively proven ridiculous story. This is usually the part where I rattle off a list of about 30 things that are just not possible for the dumb conpiracy story (i.e. the 1000's of people that woul have been required to plan and flawlessly execute while remaining silent for 6 years, the physical eyewitnesses who watched planes hit the Pentagon, the logistics of pre-wiring explosives during unotices power downs in 2 of the most secure buildings in the world)....but I'm sick of it, and I'm guessing most rational people are as well. Answering you people with facts doesn't seem to work. |
are you against what Gary Garver does too?
I'm actually fucking with you - its not that important to me the question he is asking, BUT the FREE press is what is supposed to keep our gov't in check - right now our press corps for the most part are either corporate lackies or pussies - so ask yourself even if you disagree with the guy's question - you have to be appalled that someone with press credentials was arrested - if this happened in China perhaps you'd see it as an issue - not sure why you feel it is ok to happen in America - is that the America you want? |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by Oz
are you against what Gary Garver does too?
I'm actually fucking with you - its not that important to me the question he is asking, BUT the FREE press is what is supposed to keep our gov't in check - right now our press corps for the most part are either corporate lackies or pussies - so ask yourself even if you disagree with the guy's question - you have to be appalled that someone with press credentials was arrested - if this happened in China perhaps you'd see it as an issue - not sure why you feel it is ok to happen in America - is that the America you want? |
That's the funny thing about left wing liberalism. They claim to be about all kinds of freedoms of expression, except the ones they don't like. |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
That's the funny thing about left wing liberalism. They claim to be about all kinds of freedoms of expression, except the ones they don't like. |
:scratch: who is the liberal we're talking about? |
|
|
| Snoopyrules |
| I agree that he should not have been arrested, no reporter should. This does not mean that everyone should be open to being subjected to that kind of tactic. It's tabloid journalism and it does not provide the public with answers. He should have been removed. |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Correct me if I'm wrong, but when the guy who was taken out (from "Info Wars") was arguing with one of Giuliani's staff the staff guy was asking to "see his credentials" and the "Info Wars" guy started to go on about going over to his computer and watching google video.
Where the disconnect is, and again correct me if I'm wrong, is that he was asking to see his press pass and I didn't see the Info Wars guy have it around his neck and hold it up. He claimed he had credentials, but I didn't see them (unlike the guy who was with his group that was interviewed at the end of the youtube clip). So was this guy taken out because he didn't have the proper press credentials (not the verbal blessing of CNN or whomever)? |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by Snoopyrules
I agree that he should not have been arrested, no reporter should. This does not mean that everyone should be open to being subjected to that kind of tactic. It's tabloid journalism and it does not provide the public with answers. He should have been removed. |
Do you disagree with what Gary Garver does? And honestly do you know what led up to this? Its not on tape so how can we comment on perhaps the reporter was being gracious and suspender dick said something - who knows. |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by VacateTheWord
Correct me if I'm wrong, but when the guy who was taken out (from "Info Wars") was arguing with one of Giuliani's staff the staff guy was asking to "see his credentials" and the "Info Wars" guy started to go on about going over to his computer and watching google video.
Where the disconnect is, and again correct me if I'm wrong, is that he was asking to see his press pass and I didn't see the Info Wars guy have it around his neck and hold it up. He claimed he had credentials, but I didn't see them (unlike the guy who was with his group that was interviewed at the end of the youtube clip). So was this guy taken out because he didn't have the proper press credentials (not the verbal blessing of CNN or whomever)? |
who the fuck is Guiliani's "staff guy"? is he running the convention hall? fuck him.
If the guy didn't have credentials then that's a problem - but I would have told suspender douche to cram it too. |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Quote: Originally posted by Oz
who the fuck is Guiliani's "staff guy"? is he running the convention hall? fuck him.
If the guy didn't have credentials then that's a problem - but I would have told suspender douche to cram it too. |
All I'm saying is let's get the facts straight.
If this guy had the proper credentials and was arrested, then I would fully agree that it was completely wrong. If, however, one of the requirements for being in that room asking questions was the proper press credentials (the laminated card that people had around their necks) and this guy didn't have it, then the police were right to remove him.
Despite how people may feel, access to Presidential candidates has to be controlled, so I would assume getting press credentials would entail a background check, especially to new folks.
Again, just trying to get the story straight. |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by VacateTheWord
All I'm saying is let's get the facts straight.
If this guy had the proper credentials and was arrested, then I would fully agree that it was completely wrong. If, however, one of the requirements for being in that room asking questions was the proper press credentials (the laminated card that people had around their necks) and this guy didn't have it, then the police were right to remove him.
Despite how people may feel, access to Presidential candidates has to be controlled, so I would assume getting press credentials would entail a background check, especially to new folks.
Again, just trying to get the story straight. |
By all accounts he had received the credentials weeks ago. CNN tried and failed to prevent him from being arrested. |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by VacateTheWord
All I'm saying is let's get the facts straight.
If this guy had the proper credentials and was arrested, then I would fully agree that it was completely wrong. If, however, one of the requirements for being in that room asking questions was the proper press credentials (the laminated card that people had around their necks) and this guy didn't have it, then the police were right to remove him.
Despite how people may feel, access to Presidential candidates has to be controlled, so I would assume getting press credentials would entail a background check, especially to new folks.
Again, just trying to get the story straight. |
you're not setting any story straight - if he didn't have credentials then there's a problem - he claims he did and if he did then he has a case - if he doesn't then he has a problem
you have an issue that you hold elected officials in higher regard than the private citizens - that's a HUGE issue |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by Oz
:scratch: who is the liberal we're talking about? |
Snoopy and people who I would described as left wing gatekeepers. Those are liberals who present the facade of opposition while covering up the crimes of neo cons.
Bill Maher, Amy Goodman, Michael Moore, Noam Chomsky are good examples of left wing gatekeepers. |
|
|
| Snoopyrules |
Quote: Originally posted by Oz
Do you disagree with what Gary Garver does? And honestly do you know what led up to this? Its not on tape so how can we comment on perhaps the reporter was being gracious and suspender dick said something - who knows. |
If that was the case, it would have been mentioend by the you tube kid or his blogger friend. Anything that could be used to spin their story is used. They even resort to making shit up (the detention center stuff is to make it sound like they're being send to Gitmo; it's creative journalism). The evidence of technique is clearly evident on that tape, it's confrontational and the odds are that the first encounter was that You Tube bomdardment. It's a loon operational tool.
The Gary Garver example does not make sense, but if you want to know....it's funny. That is supposed to be the result. The result of the web dweebs actions are to continue to spin a make believe story of a vast conspiracy. While they both have a clear purpose, neither are examples of journalism. |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Quote: Originally posted by Oz
you're not setting any story straight - if he didn't have credentials then there's a problem - he claims he did and if he did then he has a case - if he doesn't then he has a problem
you have an issue that you hold elected officials in higher regard than the private citizens - that's a HUGE issue |
No Oz, I get what you are saying. Candidates should be accessible to the citizens, but surely you know that precautions have to be taken. For example, look at how Barack Obama needs secret service protection now because some wacko made threats. The reality is that there needs to be a balance - accessibility but protection for the candidates. It's not about holding elected officials in higher regard - it's a matter of practicality. You just can't throw open the doors and let anyone in.
As for this guy, "claiming" he had the proper credentials is not the same as actually having them. Again, where was the laminated card hanging from his neck? I didn't see him display that at all.
And again, I'm opposed to him getting thrown out for asking a question - but if he didn't have the credentials to be in the room then he should have been removed. |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by VacateTheWord
No Oz, I get what you are saying. Candidates should be accessible to the citizens, but surely you know that precautions have to be taken. For example, look at how Barack Obama needs secret service protection now because some wacko made threats. The reality is that there needs to be a balance - accessibility but protection for the candidates. It's not about holding elected officials in higher regard - it's a matter of practicality. You just can't throw open the doors and let anyone in.
As for this guy, "claiming" he had the proper credentials is not the same as actually having them. Again, where was the laminated card hanging from his neck? I didn't see him display that at all.
And again, I'm opposed to him getting thrown out for asking a question - but if he didn't have the credentials to be in the room then he should have been removed. |
Goddamn dude you have comprehension problems. He was not thrown out, he was arrested. |
|
|
| Snoopyrules |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
Snoopy and people who I would described as left wing gatekeepers. Those are liberals who present the facade of opposition while covering up the crimes of neo cons.
Bill Maher, Amy Goodman, Michael Moore, Noam Chomsky are good examples of left wing gatekeepers. |
And you're an example of a typical conspiracy theorist who has invented a world of such incredible intrigue in his head that you have completely lost any ability to think rationally. Fortunately for you, you're not alone. There is a very small group of passionate idiots like yourself that you can continue to play make believe spy games with while the majority of people roll their eyes to your silliness. |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by Snoopyrules
And you're an example of a typical conspiracy theorist who has invented a world of such incredible intrigue in his head that you have completely lost any ability to think rationally. Fortunately for you, you're not alone. There is a very small group of passionate idiots like yourself that you can continue to play make believe spy games with while the majority of people roll their eyes to your silliness. |
Keep supporting Giuliani and his facist tactics. You're a sheep to the slaughter. The far left and the far right eventually meet at facism. |
|
|
| Snoopyrules |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
Keep supporting Giuliani and his facist tactics. You're a sheep to the slaughter. The far left and the far right eventually meet at facism. |
Keep linking anyone what doesn't support a stupid story with supporting republicans. That seems to be working better than that stupid story you're inventing on the fly. |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
Goddamn dude you have comprehension problems. He was not thrown out, he was arrested. |
Can you answer the question - did he have the proper credentials to be there (the laminated card around his neck that the guy from his group showed at the end of the youtube clip)?
Well.... |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by VacateTheWord
No Oz, I get what you are saying. Candidates should be accessible to the citizens, but surely you know that precautions have to be taken. For example, look at how Barack Obama needs secret service protection now because some wacko made threats. The reality is that there needs to be a balance - accessibility but protection for the candidates. It's not about holding elected officials in higher regard - it's a matter of practicality. You just can't throw open the doors and let anyone in.
As for this guy, "claiming" he had the proper credentials is not the same as actually having them. Again, where was the laminated card hanging from his neck? I didn't see him display that at all.
And again, I'm opposed to him getting thrown out for asking a question - but if he didn't have the credentials to be in the room then he should have been removed. |
not saying security isn't needed - and as of now we have to assume this guy had credentials - he was with the press corp -
Quote: Originally posted by Snoopyrules
If that was the case, it would have been mentioend by the you tube kid or his blogger friend. Anything that could be used to spin their story is used. They even resort to making shit up (the detention center stuff is to make it sound like they're being send to Gitmo; it's creative journalism). The evidence of technique is clearly evident on that tape, it's confrontational and the odds are that the first encounter was that You Tube bomdardment. It's a loon operational tool.
The Gary Garver example does not make sense, but if you want to know....it's funny. That is supposed to be the result. The result of the web dweebs actions are to continue to spin a make believe story of a vast conspiracy. While they both have a clear purpose, neither are examples of journalism. |
how do you know it would have been mentioned? we only saw a snippet of the entire picture - do you always make decisions like this? Do you see a car's odometer and it says 15 miles on it so you buy it on the spot not looking at the entire car to notice it is completely rusted out?
Gary Garver does the same thing - he asks irreverent questions -this guy was asking a serious question (he thought it was) as a member of the press - stop acting like you are a know it all |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
He wasn't "removed" he was arrested, asshole.
Do you have the nuts to admit that it's unconstitutional and un American to arrest someone for asking a question? |
Show me the booking statement . |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
He wasn't "removed" he was arrested, asshole.
Do you have the nuts to admit that it's unconstitutional and un American to arrest someone for asking a question? |
After a certain point , its harassment which is a chargeable misdemeanor offense. If your so fucking knowledgeable, what are the charges???
What are the sentencing guidelines?
What was his bail? Who posted it?
Now run off and google some answers , you always want direct questions, here are some for you to choke on. |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by Billyfromsphily
After a certain point , its harassment which is a chargeable misdemeanor offense. If your so fucking knowledgeable, what are the charges???
What are the sentencing guidelines?
What was his bail? Who posted it?
Now run off and google some answers , you always want direct questions, here are some for you to choke on. |
um, are you serious? you think that guy was being harrassing? you have a wide definition of harrassment |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
Quote: Originally posted by Oz
um, are you serious? you think that guy was being harrassing? you have a wide definition of harrassment |
He was told that his questions would not be answered. After he continued, he was infringing on the others rights and denying them their right to free speech.
I don't like it either and it does suck.
stickman still only sees things in myopic perspective. It was about the whole group , not just the asshole from the Juliani team. |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Quote: Originally posted by Oz
not saying security isn't needed - and as of now we have to assume this guy had credentials - he was with the press corp -
how do you know it would have been mentioned? we only saw a snippet of the entire picture - do you always make decisions like this? Do you see a car's odometer and it says 15 miles on it so you buy it on the spot not looking at the entire car to notice it is completely rusted out?
Gary Garver does the same thing - he asks irreverent questions -this guy was asking a serious question (he thought it was) as a member of the press - stop acting like you are a know it all |
I'm not "assuming" anything. Like you said, we only saw a "snippet" - but then again this "snippet" was enough for some people to denounce the Giuliani staff as being out of line. Like I said, I'm all for letting these people ask their questions, but the guy needed the proper credentials to be in the room. So once again, did he????
As for Gary Garver, I think he would be smart enough to cover his ass and get the proper credentials at a forum like this so he didn't land in jail. It isn't the questions that would get him arrested - it would be the lack of credentials and I'm sure he would know better than to just show up and then bitch about "free speech" as he is being hauled away.
This is being spun as a guy who was arrested for "merely asking a question." I say either show proof that he had the credentials to be there, or accept the fact that the Presidential candidates need protection and no one has the "right" to just walk in with their webcam and ask questions. Sorry, but precautions have to be taken. |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by Billyfromsphily
He was told that his questions would not be answered. After he continued, he was infringing on the others rights and denying them their right to free speech.
I don't like it either and it does suck.
stickman still only sees things in myopic perspective. It was about the whole group , not just the asshole from the Juliani team. |
sorry - but that's not harrassment - Suspender man could walk away but he had to be the tough guy in the face of the infowars nerd -
Quote: Originally posted by VacateTheWord
I'm not "assuming" anything. Like you said, we only saw a "snippet" - but then again this "snippet" was enough for some people to denounce the Giuliani staff as being out of line. Like I said, I'm all for letting these people ask their questions, but the guy needed the proper credentials to be in the room. So once again, did he????
As for Gary Garver, I think he would be smart enough to cover his ass and get the proper credentials at a forum like this so he didn't land in jail. It isn't the questions that would get him arrested - it would be the lack of credentials and I'm sure he would know better than to just show up and then bitch about "free speech" as he is being hauled away.
This is being spun as a guy who was arrested for "merely asking a question." I say either show proof that he had the credentials to be there, or accept the fact that the Presidential candidates need protection and no one has the "right" to just walk in with their webcam and ask questions. Sorry, but precautions have to be taken. |
it is true that we don't see the whole thing - but we do know that Suspender man did not suddenly change his mind in allowing Giuliani to suddenly answer - the facts will come out - keep your eye on smokinggun - |
|
|
| DUDE-HERE |
Quote: Originally posted by johnincleveland
This is are free country. There isn't a fucking thing free in this country. Free to do what they tell us we can do. |
tell us what your not free to do 1st |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by DUDE-HERE
tell us what your not free to do 1st |
:rolleyes: you're not free to smoke pot but you do it anyway |
|
|
| DUDE-HERE |
Quote: Originally posted by Oz
:rolleyes: you're not free to smoke pot but you do it anyway |
yes i am. i have a doctors note ..i live in Los Angeles |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by DUDE-HERE
yes i am in have a docs note ..i live in Los Angeles |
what is your ailment? |
|
|
| DUDE-HERE |
Quote: Originally posted by Oz
what is your ailment? |
i said knee pain...migranes..at least thats what i told the doctor and sleep |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by DUDE-HERE
i said knee pain...migranes..at least thats what i told the doctor and sleep |
so you're not only smoking marijuana illegally you're fraudulently obtaining a prescription - I believe those are felonies when couple together |
|
|
| DUDE-HERE |
Quote: Originally posted by Oz
so you're not only smoking marijuana illegally you're fraudulently obtaining a prescription - I believe those are felonies when couple together |
you couldn't be more wrong
The text of the Prop 215 initiative follows:
Section 1. Section 11362.5 is added to the California Health and Safety Code, to read:
11362.5. (a) This section shall be known and may be cited as the Compassionate Use Act of 1996.
(b) (1) The people of the State of California hereby find and declare that the purposes of the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 are as follows:
(A) To ensure that seriously ill Californians have the right to obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes where that medical use is deemed appropriate and has been recommended by a physician who has determined that the persons health would benefit from the use of marijuana in the treatment of cancer, anorexia, AIDS, chronic pain, spasticity, glaucoma, arthritis, migraine or any other illness for which marijuana provides relief.
(B) To ensure that patients and their primary caregivers who obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes upon the recommendation of a physician are not subject to criminal prosecution or sanction.
(C) To encourage the federal and state governments to implement a plan for the safe and affordable distribution of marijuana to all patients in medical need of marijuana.
(2) Nothing in this act shall be construed to supersede legislation prohibiting persons from engaging in conduct that endangers others, nor to condone the diversion of marijuana for non-medical purposes.
(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no physician in this state shall be punished, or denied any right or privilege, for having recommended marijuana to a patient for medical purposes.
(d) Section 11357, relating to the possession of marijuana, and Section 11358, relating to the cultivation of marijuana, shall not apply to a patient, or to a patient's primary caregiver, who possesses or cultivates marijuana for the personal medical purposes of the patient upon the written or oral recommendation or approval of a physician.
(e) For the purposes of this section, Primary caregiver means the individual designated by the person exempted under this act who has consistently assumed responsibility for the housing, health or safety of that person.
Sec. 2. If any provision of this measure or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the measure which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this measure are severable.
Safe Access Now |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by DUDE-HERE
you couldn't be more wrong
The text of the Prop 215 initiative follows:
Section 1. Section 11362.5 is added to the California Health and Safety Code, to read:
11362.5. (a) This section shall be known and may be cited as the Compassionate Use Act of 1996.
(b) (1) The people of the State of California hereby find and declare that the purposes of the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 are as follows:
(A) To ensure that seriously ill Californians have the right to obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes where that medical use is deemed appropriate and has been recommended by a physician who has determined that the persons health would benefit from the use of marijuana in the treatment of cancer, anorexia, AIDS, chronic pain, spasticity, glaucoma, arthritis, migraine or any other illness for which marijuana provides relief.
(B) To ensure that patients and their primary caregivers who obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes upon the recommendation of a physician are not subject to criminal prosecution or sanction.
(C) To encourage the federal and state governments to implement a plan for the safe and affordable distribution of marijuana to all patients in medical need of marijuana.
(2) Nothing in this act shall be construed to supersede legislation prohibiting persons from engaging in conduct that endangers others, nor to condone the diversion of marijuana for non-medical purposes.
(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no physician in this state shall be punished, or denied any right or privilege, for having recommended marijuana to a patient for medical purposes.
(d) Section 11357, relating to the possession of marijuana, and Section 11358, relating to the cultivation of marijuana, shall not apply to a patient, or to a patient's primary caregiver, who possesses or cultivates marijuana for the personal medical purposes of the patient upon the written or oral recommendation or approval of a physician.
(e) For the purposes of this section, Primary caregiver means the individual designated by the person exempted under this act who has consistently assumed responsibility for the housing, health or safety of that person.
Sec. 2. If any provision of this measure or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the measure which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this measure are severable.
Safe Access Now |
except for the fact that your particular ailments are made up for the express purpose of obtaining a prescription - which is fraudulent - plus you have a large amount of cannibas some of which I'm going to guess is obtained outside your prescription - you should be in jail |
|
|
| DUDE-HERE |
Quote: Originally posted by Oz
except for the fact that your particular ailments are made up for the express purpose of obtaining a prescription - which is fraudulent - plus you have a large amount of cannibas some of which I'm going to guess is obtained outside your prescription - you should be in jail |
no, i do have kneee pain...and i do have a problem sleeping which is when i eat a canibis rice krispy treat that i made |
|
|
| Snoopyrules |
| Was this thread Holy Elvised? |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by DUDE-HERE
no, i do have kneee pain...and i do have a problem sleeping which is when i eat a canibis rice krispy treat that i made |
you should use only Pharm company approved methods - you clearly hate America and mock what it gives you |
|
|
| harley-davidson |
| Quote: no, i do have kneee pain...and i do have a problem sleeping which is when i eat a canibis rice krispy treat that i made |
We used to make hash brownies, :lol: this fucking guy is making rice krispie treats with it, L. A. doctors prescribing it for insomnia, I never thought it would be that easy, years ago I used to party with a doctor, only guy I ever knew that bought 1/4 pound at a time for his own personal use....true story. ( he could afford it ) |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by Snoopyrules
Was this thread Holy Elvised? |
I believe it was. I'm going to freak out and spam all your threads, then I'll be put in TO and try to get myself out by insulting the mods and Mutt. |
|
|
| NC-Stern-Mark |
| Bunch of bullshit. Annoying 9-11 conspiracy theorists trying to demand the answer they think needs to be given. The police should have took the wood to his head. |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by NC-Stern-Mark
Bunch of bullshit. Annoying 9-11 conspiracy theorists trying to demand the answer they think needs to be given. The police should have took the wood to his head. |
Spoken like a true fucking douchebag facist. You ever see those old films of what the French did to Nazi collaborators after the liberation? |
|
|
| Max-the-Silent |
All kidding aside, and I'm not on the 9/11 truth side of this - If the individual that was arrested held valid press credentials and complied with I.D.'ing himself as requested, there was not a valid reason for the arrest.
Often times at all types of events, event organizers or security people have individuals removed from the facility, sometimes for good reasons, sometimes for no reason at all.
This being a presidential campaign event, the officers on site were most likely ordered to effect the arrest - they didn't come up with the idea all on their own.
Rudy's proclivities towards police action are well known, and I don't know if the arrest was the result of genuine discomfort from the type of questions that would be posed by an infowars reporter, or the general dislike Rudy has for any question that doesn't please his royal highness. |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by Max-the-Silent
Rudy's proclivities towards police action are well known, and I don't know if the arrest was the result of genuine discomfort from the type of questions that would be posed by an infowars reporter, or the general dislike Rudy has for any question that doesn't please his royal highness. |
Both. |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
| Where is the proof of the arrest ? So far its only hearsay on this thread. He was escorted from sight, but where is the cut and paste proof of his arrest and booking? |
|
|
| BarkonCue |
Heres an update !
Read More: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0706/S00036.htm
How can a press secretary for Giuliani order the arrest of anyone, this is ludicrous.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manchester, NH - Freelance reporter Matt Lepacek, reporting for Infowars.com, was arrested for asking a question to one of Giuliani's staff members in a press conference. The press secretary identified the New York based reporter as having previously asked Giuliani about his prior knowledge of WTC building collapses and ordered New Hampshire state police to arrest him.
Jason Bermas, reporting for Infowars and America: Freedom to Fascism, confirmed Lepacek had official CNN press credentials for the Republican debate. However, his camera was seized by staff members who shut off the camera, according to Luke Rudkowski, also a freelance Infowars reporter on the scene. He said police physically assaulted both reporters after Rudkowski objected that they were official members of the press and that nothing illegal had taken place. Police reportedly damaged the Infowars-owned camera in the process.
Reporters were questioning Giuliani staff members on a variety of issues, including his apparent ignorance of the 9/11 Commission Report, according to Bermas. The staff members accused the reporters of Ron Paul partisanship, which press denied. It was at this point that Lepacek, who was streaming a live report, asked a staff member about Giuliani's statement to Peter Jennings that he was told beforehand that the WTC buildings would collapse.
Giuliani's press secretary then called over New Hampshire state police, fingering Lepacek.
Though CNN staff members tried to persuade police not to arrest the accredited reporter-- in violation of the First Amendment, Lepacek was taken to jail. The police station told JonesReport.com that Lepacek is being charged with felony criminal trespass. Multiple witnesses on the scene reported that the state police were also heard discussing charges of espionage.
Wearing a webcam at a press event is not an act of espionage. Alex Jones, who was watching the live feed, witnessed Lepacek announce that he was wearing a camera connected to a laptop that was transmitting the press conference live at approximately 9:20 EST. When Lepacek announced that he was broadcasting live, Giuliani staff members responded by getting upset at his questions and ordering his arrest.
Freedom to Fascism reporter Samuel Ettaro was also dragged out after asking a question on Giuliani's ties with Cintra and Macquerie, two foreign contractors involved with the contentious Trans-Texas Corridor under development in Texas.
The entire incident took place in a large press auditorium, apart from the debate stages where authorized media were able to question candidates and their handlers. |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by Billyfromsphily
Where is the proof of the arrest ? So far its only hearsay on this thread. He was escorted from sight, but where is the cut and paste proof of his arrest and booking? |
Do you not know how to even click a fucking link. Pathetic. |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
Do you not know how to even click a fucking link. Pathetic. |
Nah I could but its better that you post some more stuff about a stupid issue! |
|
|
| bigbump |
| this guy is a bullshit artist. don't fall for it. he's a disturbed asshole. |
|
|
| FatesWebb |
| why do you guys hate america, and the first ammendment so much? |
|
|
| Tech Difficulty |
| someone was illegally arrested and detained for asking a question about rudy guiliani? that sounds like an absolute clear violation of someones civil rights. this is a severe charge indeed. are you sure that you want to claim that there is a police force that is so stupid as to publicly violate someones civil rights and think they can get away with it? this story sounds like there are a lot of facts missing from this "questioners" intentions or the motives behind his "questioning" |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by FatesWebb
why do you guys hate america, and the first ammendment so much? |
Is the Fates man back?!? |
|
|
|
|
|
