So much for "freedom of speech"

[richardm]

US Protocol crumbles on Hu visit.

In Beijing, television screens showing the BBC and CNN went to black as the cameras focused on Wang Wenyi shouting out "President Hu, your days are numbered".

Okay, so it's not surprising that the Chinese, with their dreadful human rights record, would pull the plug on this woman.

President Bush apologised to his Chinese guest for this unfortunate incident - but it showed the gulf that remains between these two countries.

And I can just about see that a good host would apologise for embarrassment caused to a guest. And I guess that someone disrupting a press conference should be removed.

But:

Secret Service spokesman Jim Mackin said she had been charged with disorderly conduct and that a charge of intimidating or disrupting foreign officials also was being considered.

Eh? You're not allowed to heckle politicians? Surely some mistake. I must say I'm rather surprised by this; it must be a (potential) misuse of that law.

 

[zenith-nadir]

Eh? You're not allowed to heckle politicians? Surely some mistake. I must say I'm rather surprised by this; it must be a (potential) misuse of that law.

I was blown away to find out that she was arrested "for heckling" and that Bush apologized to the Chinese leader. What narrow shoulders these leaders have.

 

[WildCat]

Eh? You're not allowed to heckle politicians? Surely some mistake. I must say I'm rather surprised by this; it must be a (potential) misuse of that law.

Apparently, she had a press pass and had covered the White House before w/o problems. She did her heckling from a press area while standing on a camera platform. This is why she was arrested, not simply because she was protesting. There were protestors all around the White House yesterday, none were arrested as far as I know.

I think it makes sense that there not be protestors in the press areas, there has to be some order to these things.

CNN story.

 

[brodski]

I think it makes sense that there not be protestors in the press areas, there has to be some order to these things.

Then ask her to leave and revoke her access to whiethouse press events, don't consider criminal charges.

 

[WildCat]

Then ask her to leave and revoke her access to whiethouse press events, don't consider criminal charges.

I wouldn't be surprised if the charges are dropped, but she can forget about ever having a WH press pass ever again.

Does anyone know what regulations (if any) are in place governing the press in such circumstances? A relative of mine was a WH reporter for decades, but he's been dead for 15 years or so, only John Edwards could ask him for me!

 

[CFLarsen]

I was blown away to find out that she was arrested "for heckling" and that Bush apologized to the Chinese leader. What narrow shoulders these leaders have.

Danish saying: "His shoulders are as broad as the distance between the eyes of a herring"...

 

[brodski]

I wouldn't be surprised if the charges are dropped, but she can forget about ever having a WH press pass ever again.

Charging her in the first place is still wrong, the Government should not even consider bringing criminal proceedings against someone for a peaceful protest, even if those criminal proceeding are later halted.
Just look at the criticism Denmark got for even contemplating the possibility that publishing cartoons may be against Blasphemy laws, I can't see how this situation is any better.
I agree that this administration has no obligation, moral or otherwise, or ever considering her for a WH press pass again, but there is a big difference between the Govt acting like any other body and saying "not in my house" and threating a journalist prosecution for speaking out against a dictator, even if it could cause a little diplomatic trouble.

 

[TragicMonkey]

I wouldn't be surprised if the charges are dropped, but she can forget about ever having a WH press pass ever again.

Apparently it's not difficult to get a WH press pass under an assumed name, if your politics are right.

 

[Grammatron]

Then ask her to leave and revoke her access to whiethouse press events, don't consider criminal charges.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's my understanding she was asked to leave and refused, hence the charge.

 

[kalen]

Apparently, she had a press pass and had covered the White House before w/o problems. She did her heckling from a press area while standing on a camera platform. This is why she was arrested, not simply because she was protesting. There were protestors all around the White House yesterday, none were arrested as far as I know.

I think it makes sense that there not be protestors in the press areas, there has to be some order to these things.

CNN story.

She was in the press area and not the "free speech zone." How ironic.

 

[roger]

If your let into a restricted area under the promise of performing a specific job, you don't have free speech, and you don't have the right to disrupt what is happening in that restricted area. I don't have free speech at my job; why should she?

 

[brodski]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's my understanding she was asked to leave and refused, hence the charge.

I have not herd that version of events, can you provide a link?

Even if it is true I have a hard time to believe that her refusal to leave, rather than the words she shouted, where cause for "a charge of intimidating or disrupting foreign officials" which "was being considered".
(quotes from the OP)

 

[brodski]

If your let into a restricted area under the promise of performing a specific job, you don't have free speech, and you don't have the right to disrupt what is happening in that restricted area. I don't have free speech at my job; why should she?

But you do have fee speech at your job with regarding to airing your political opinions, you may get fired for it, but you won't get prosecuted for it. That is the difference.

 

[Grammatron]

If your let into a restricted area under the promise of performing a specific job, you don't have free speech, and you don't have the right to disrupt what is happening in that restricted area. I don't have free speech at my job; why should she?

I agree, though I think arresting her is a bit much.

 

[jj]

She was in the press area and not the "free speech zone." How ironic.

Yep, that says it all, like the "free speech zones" when Bush came to Seattle last campaign...

Why just not call them "short-term concentration camps"? It's what they are.

 

[roger]

But you do have fee speech at your job with regarding to airing your political opinions, you may get fired for it, but you won't get prosecuted for it. That is the difference.

Ah, I'm looking at it differently. Ignore for the moment that this was a political speech event. Make it a, I don't know, a book reading. And somebody starts screetching about, oh, how their hemmrhoids hurt. They are creating a disturbance. If they subsequently refused to leave when asked, they'd get arrested.

 

[roger]

I can't find a reference to her being asked to leave, and refusing. I did find this however http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,11069-2143269,00.html

Within seconds she was led away, struggling and still crying out, by a group of uniformed White House staff.

She clearly resisted. I guess if she didn't resist, I'd feel that charges were perhaps an overreaction.

ETA: I take that back. She misrepresented herself. She applied, and passed through several levels of security to get the pass, and then to get onto the grounds themselves. She deserves it.

 

[jj]

Well, Monarchs, Dictators and others who have (or want to have) absolute power have feared the words of minorities since the dawn of recorded history. It's neither surprising that the protestor is being charged with a crime in order to keep her out of the way nor that a monarch would apologize to a dictator for a little bit of reality leaking into the proceedings.

On the other hand, the protestor is a bit, well, off, too, if I understand the complaint. I think this one goes 0/3.

 

[Anti_Hypeman]

Yelling "Free Iran" is free speech

Yelling "Free China" is treason

Why cant you freedom haters see the difference?

 

[Grammatron]

Yep, that says it all, like the "free speech zones" when Bush came to Seattle last campaign...

Why just not call them "short-term concentration camps"? It's what they are.

Because you don't have to be in them and can leave any time?