Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Philosopher who wrote (68384)	11/26/2002 12:45:17 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Outraged over the killing of a demonstrator by a state trooper in Marion, Alabama, the black community of Marion decided to hold a march. Martin Luther King agreed to lead the marchers on Sunday, March 7, from Selma, Alabama to Montgomery, Alabama, the state capital. At the state capital they would appeal directly to governor George Wallace to stop police brutality and call attention to their struggle for voting rights. When Governor Wallace refused to allow the march, Dr. King went to Washington to speak with President Johnson, delaying the demonstration until March 8. The people of Selma however, felt that they could not wait and began the march on Sunday March 7, which became known as "Bloody Sunday". When the marchers reached the city line at Edmund Pettus Bridge, they found a posse of state troopers waiting for them. As the demonstrators crossed the bridge leading out of Selma, they were ordered to disperse, but the troopers did not wait for their warning to be headed. They immediately attacked the crowd of people who had bowed their heads in prayer. Using tear gas and batons, the troopers chased the demonstrators to a black housing project, where they continued to beat the demonstrators as well as residents of the project who had not been at the march. Martin Luther King lead a march to the Selma bridge on Tuesday, March 9, during which one protester was killed. Finally, with President Lyndon Johnson's permission, Dr. King led a successful march from Selma to Montgomery on March, 25. During the Selma marches hundreds of marchers were jailed and injured. The marches were marred by death as well, when two Northern whites participating in the march were murdered and a minister was beaten to death in the streets of the town. Over the next few months the aftermath of the March violence would continue for civil rights workers. J. Edgar Hoover, director of the FBI announced that the FBI would not provide protection to civil rights workers in Mississippi. Bloody Sunday received considerable national attention, and numerous marches were organized in response. As a result President Johnson gave a rousing speech to congress concerning civil rights which was instrumental in the passage of the Voting Rights Act within that same year. virtualscholar.com I have no doubt that the animus derived from protection of the racial order, but it is true that the marchers did not get the necessary license to march, and the action against them was under "color of law"......I will retrieve something on Skokie, next......

To: The Philosopher who wrote (68384)	11/26/2002 1:51:00 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Unfortunately, I have not been able to get a full enough exposition of the arguments used in the Skokie case. However, the risk of riot was mentioned, as a rationale for demanding insurance coverage as a condition of the permit, and intimidation was mentioned as regards the survivors. Oddly enough, if Skokie had not obviously passed the insurance ordinance to deal with the Nazis, it might have been upheld. Also, the Court did mention that the effect on the community, and especially survivors, was something to weigh in considering the case, but held that the offense could not be adequately distinguished from other strong forms of disapproval that would not be sufficient to veto the Nazi's right to march. It mentioned that if the citizens were a captive audience, or the march involved trespass or vandalism, then Skokie would win. My own position is that the route, through residential areas, in effect made some residents a captive audience, since they should not have to flee their homes in order to avoid the parade, and that the indemnity was reasonable on its face, if it would be reasonable had it been established policy, considering the drain on the town budget to repair any damage that might ensue if things got unruly. Thus, game and point go to Skokie........