you could raise up a small banner/placard

“I’m not really a fan. Have you not noticed that I’m a liberal-wishy-washy tree free love for all tree hugger?”

no. believing in media freedom per se isn’t an indicator of being “a liberal-wishy-washy tree free love for all tree hugger”

what i’ve noticed is an insistence on calling an endeavor to merely keep media out of the danger zone (not really preventing media from writing and reporting) an assault on press freedom

tingnan mo naman ‘call’ lang ni-rebuff na agad. paano kaya pag mas grabe pa tulad ng ‘threat’.

I’m not really a fan. Have you not noticed that I’m a liberal-wishy-washy tree free love for all tree hugger?

“I guess I’ll leave it at that if you believe that a civil government retains the moral high ground by issuing “THREATS”.”

okay, as long as you put “threats” in quotations.

“Incidentally, I’m watching Antonin Scalia speak next week. I’ll send in a good word”

Thanks. Wow, are you going to meet him in person? If you ever meet Laurence Tribe also, please say hi to him for me, a big fan of his. Same with John Roberts.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/keelty-rebuffed-by-minister-over-media-comments/2008/01/31/1201714153269.html

I guess I’ll leave it at that if you believe that a civil government retains the moral high ground by issuing “THREATS”.

Incidentally, I’m watching Antonin Scalia speak next week. I’ll send in a good word.

“Pardon me if I’m wrong.”

oh yes you are wrong. but you are pardoned.

Pare ko, look at it this way:

all the government wants is for media to stay out of the danger zone, okay? government is not stopping media from writing and reporting about the event.

to refresh you of the issue:

we are not talking here about the case for damages suffered by the arrested media during the Manila Pen circus.

what we are talking about here is: if an event like the Manila Pen circus happens again, and if media will insist to be in the cross-fire again, government will arrest them. The media took issue with this, and want the court (1) to stop government from making the threats, and
(2) to compel the government to grant them entry in the danger zone
the next time another Manila Pen circus-like event takes place!

to borrow DJB’s words – government simply wants media to be 50 meters away from the scene, not 5 inches away!

“…so what? no law broken there yet, so NO threats required. if it so happens that the media, by being in the crossfire, became an accessory to the crime, then by all means, throw the book at them”

in the same vein, the government hasn’t broken any law yet, hasn’t prevented media from being in another danger zone, yet why did the media crybabies go to court for a future event?

“All I’m saying is that you do not need threats to remind people that we actually have laws. Much the same way that you do not need to be OA and have two platoons guarding GMA all the time as if she was a G8 leader (who incidentally, don’t have as an elaborate security detail as GMA with the exception of Dubya and Putin)”

sorry to differ, but the media crybabies are acting as if they don’t know the law, or the only law they know is their freedom of expression. hence the resort to ‘threats’

my friend, all the government is asking is for media to stay out of the danger zone! no more, no less! to repeat for the nth time, media are not prevented from writing and reporting about the event!

as for the OA guarding of gloria – diskarte ng PSG yon