Reporting In From The Liberty Forum

Print This Post

25 Responses

  1. TomB says:

    This afternoon I'm giving a talk on how legal threats from cops and citizens chill online free speech,

    Heck, I got this one for you. Just review Bill Schmalfeldt's Twitter timeline for the past day or so. That'll keep you on topic for hours.

    (he's having some death threats sent to him, from his own website)

  2. Gary McGath says:

    I'm stuck at work today, but I'm planning on catching your talk tomorrow.

  3. Speed says:

    Tomorrow I'm on a panel about dealing with the police when one encounters them non-socially.

    Short panel — Just. Shut. Up.

  4. Chris says:

    Are any of these talks being livestreamed or uploaded to the internet? They sound interesting.

  5. Matthew Cline says:

    I am obsessively tweaking

    For just an instant, I misread that as "I am obsessively twerking".

    I particularly enjoyed the part about how the Department of Justice, having convinced her law firm to fire her, cooperated with her law firm in an effort to block her from getting unemployment benefits.

    Wow, how petty.

  6. AlanMorgan says:

    "Pro se is Latin for unmedicated and litigious" is probably not the right fit for this group.

    But they are the ones that most need to hear it!

  7. Ryan says:

    As a complete and total tangent, I'd like to point out that as Ms. Radack is not a UK citizen, she does not have a legal right to enter the UK, and thus UK border officers can ask her *almost* whatever they like about her travel history, reasons for travel to the UK, work, and associates. Thus is the power of international immigration laws. While her experience is unfortunate and is quite telling concerning the web of American intelligence/security connections, nothing about her treatment by the UK is illegal or even unreasonable. If she doesn't want to be questioned by UK immigration, she has a very simple option: don't travel to/through the UK. The same goes with any country. UK immigration has a special reason to question her because she is a human rights lawyer and may be traveling to the UK to work, in which case she may require a visa or permit to do so. Who her clients are is directly relevant to that.

    I know I'm running totally counter-Popehat in "supporting" the authorities here, but immigration matters in the news push my buttons because so few people understand that the only country they have a right to enter are ones in which they hold citizenship (and in some cases, citizenship+residency).

  8. Kevin says:

    @Ryan, I don't think anyone is saying her treatment was illegal. But it definitely wasn't "reasonable". She was asked questions they already knew the answers to, purely for the purpose of intimidation. This was not some kind of "legitimate investigation", it was harassment. That may well be legal for UK border agents to do to noncitizens, but it doesn't make it any less petty, vindictive, or beneath the dignity of what was once a great nation.

  9. Jack B. says:

    Here's a joke that might work for that crowd: "I just flew in from Los Angeles, and boy, are the TSA's arms tired."

  10. Ken in NH says:

    If I had paid attention better and known you were going to present, I would have bought my tickets for the forum and attended. I'm sure that Clark could have given me some pointers on how best to heckle encourage you. And no, you may not use my moniker while you are here. Enjoy our very wet weather.

  11. ZarroTsu says:

    @JackB: *slowclap*

  12. Irk says:

    After some wild paid sockpuppetting in the comments on the article on British border agents, someone linked to an interesting writeup of paid sockpuppet tactics and how a government or organization can derail and control online discussions:

    Seems like something people here might be interested in.

  13. ZarroTsu says:


    Statistically, there is always a percentage of the forum posters who are more inclined to violence.

    Is it ironic or fitting that this segment and statement angers me?

  14. DeadLenny says:

    @ Jack B:

    Is that your joke? That one actually made me laugh out loud. Seriously, that was three points, all net.
    (If it is yours, can I pleeeease use it at some point?)

  15. DeadLenny says:

    Sounds like a pretty awesome place to be. The name initially scared me — these days, you have the "Liberty [Whatever]" and it's hard to not expect dingbats in tri-corner hats and powdered wigs, lumpy-ass fools on Larks waving "Close The Borders!!" signs, and a small contingent of guys (it's always guys) with guns on their hips. This gig seems like it'll be pretty righteous, though. Have fun.

    And fix your PowerPoint!

  16. AlphaCentauri says:

    Hey, how come there aren't more posts by Clark ;)

  17. SIV says:

    Ken should fit right in somewhere on the continuum between his fellow convention speakers Naomi Wolf and James O'Keefe.

  18. Clark says:

    The Great Popehat Coblogger Get Together fizzled. Neither Patrick nor I were able to attend. :(

  19. And I always thought Pro Se meant you were a bit of a Cox *bada boom bada bing*

    I had too.. it was like.. just there.. ok… I'll be good now

  20. hymie! says:

    the Department of Justice, having convinced her law firm to fire her

    I thought there were laws against th…

    Oh, right. Never mind.

  21. babaganusz says:

    are any of the talks recorded for posteriority, or must one appear in meat-form to smell the munificence? the youtubings seem skimpy since '09…

  22. Mika says:

    Yeah, well, that's the difference between human rights and civil rights. Civil rights only apply to citizens and may be suspended at the border and stuff. Human rights are universal. That's the beauty. And know what? It is totally a human right not to be treated like shit by government personnel although you didn't break a law.

  23. Ivraatiems says:

    @Clark So it was just Ken and David on one side of the table, and Angus on the other, staring relentlessly back at them?

  24. Robert says:

    I'm so totally stealing that pro se joke.

  25. JWH says:

    That was true for the fantasy gaming conventions I attended in the early 1980s and it's true of mainstream political conventions and it's true of this.

    Great. Now I'm envisioning the Republican delegates from North Dakota doing a Vampire: the Masquerade LARP.