Stopping free speech

The White House is so worried that the increasing number of protestors who show up at Presidential events might intrude on the delusional world of George W. Bush that they have a manual that details how to keep dissent away from the President.

It even details how to throw dissenters out of Presidential rallies.

Writes Peter Baker of The Washington Post:

Not that they’re worried or anything. But the White House evidently leaves little to chance when it comes to protests within eyesight of the president. As in, it doesn’t want any.

A White House manual that came to light recently gives presidential advance staffers extensive instructions in the art of “deterring potential protestors” from President Bush’s public appearances around the country.

Among other things, any event must be open only to those with tickets tightly controlled by organizers. Those entering must be screened in case they are hiding secret signs. Any anti-Bush demonstrators who manage to get in anyway should be shouted down by “rally squads” stationed in strategic locations. And if that does not work, they should be thrown out.

But that does not mean the White House is against dissent — just so long as the president does not see it. In fact, the manual outlines a specific system for those who disagree with the president to voice their views. It directs the White House advance staff to ask local police “to designate a protest area where demonstrators can be placed, preferably not in the view of the event site or motorcade route.”

The “Presidential Advance Manual,” dated October 2002 with the stamp “Sensitive — Do Not Copy,” was released under subpoena to the American Civil Liberties Union as part of a lawsuit filed on behalf of two people arrested for refusing to cover their anti-Bush T-shirts at a Fourth of July speech at the West Virginia State Capitol in 2004. The techniques described have become familiar over the 6 1/2 years of Bush’s presidency, but the manual makes it clear how organized the anti-protest policy really is.

The lawsuit was filed by Jeffery and Nicole Rank, who attended the Charleston event wearing shirts with the word “Bush” crossed out on the front; the back of his shirt said “Regime Change Starts at Home,” while hers said “Love America, Hate Bush.” Members of the White House event staff told them to cover their shirts or leave, according to the lawsuit. They refused and were arrested, handcuffed and briefly jailed before local authorities dropped the charges and apologized. The federal government settled the First Amendment case last week for $80,000, but with no admission of wrongdoing.


  1. bryan mcclellan

    What a testimony to our big bad war president.Lets not hurt the smirks feelings children or he will cloud up and send his goons to run you off his playground.He’s very fragile you know. How utterly absurd he and his handlers are. Barf bags for everyone except you neocons,we know you love the taste of bile….

  2. Sandra Price

    Bryan, We must not forget that the American People voted for Bush TWICE! Our nation has little knowledge of how to locate integrity in our leaders. How many times did you hear our talk show people ask “Who would you rather have a beer with?” and that man was G.W. Bush a good-ol-boy from Texas.

    A new congress majority was elected and apparently they like having a beer with Bush. Until we start educating our children how to locate moral values, ethics and integrity, we will always elect men like Bush and women like Hillary. I’m giving up on the whole thing. Romney is gaining numbers and will soon be elected to the position of dictator of America, Mexico and Canada. At that time CHB will no doubt be on the no-fly list.

  3. ekaton

    And, once again I will point out that both the 2000 and 2004 elections were stolen. The Supreme Court had no jurisdiction over the state of Florida’s election laws and should have refused to hear the case. Gore won the popular vote by more than 600,000. Dirty tricks were used in Florida in order to disenfranchise voters whom usually vote democrat. For example, the state of Florida chose election day to seal off numerous black neighborhoods to look for at large known felons, with no one allowed in or out, thus denying the people their right to vote. In 2004 the Ohio election was rigged by tampering with electronic voting machines.

    I’m sorry, Sandra, “the people” did NOT elect George Bush in either 2000 or 2004. Every time you make this claim, someone is going to correct your assertion.

    With no malice or ill will,

    Kent Shaw

    Kent Shaw

  4. Helen Rainier


    I’ve said this before and I will keep on saying it as long as you keep saying that the American people voted for Bush TWICE!

    1. 2000 — NO, the American people did NOT VOTE for Bush. The American people voted for Gore via the popular vote. The Supreme Court “selected” Bush as pResident by stopping the Florida popular vote count.

    2. 2004 — Very questionable. Too many questions about election fraud engineered by the Republican Party.

    Stop saying the American people voted for Bush TWICE. They did NOT.

  5. bryan mcclellan

    Hi Sandra : in 2000 I said it and I’ll say it again,I wouldn’t piss on smirk if he was on fire much less waste a Hamms’ on him.You are so right in saying that the hollywood mentality is killing this country at election time.My kids know the score because I showed them the difference between smirk and shineola,as for the rest of the gimme gimmees I’m as befuddled as you.There is always the underground my Dear,see you there..


    Why protest a bunch of crooks? It would be far more effective if every citizen put a hand-made sign on their car saying, “Impeach the Crooks and Traitors. They are Dangerous as Hell” Speaking truth to power always means speaking to the people.

    John Hanks, Laramie, Wyoming

  7. hillbilly

    Kent…I agree with your post. Who knows how big the landslide would have been last year if the touch screens had been programed for each repug vote to = one rather than three?

    This ‘Presidential Advance Manual’ makes one wonder if there isn’t a ‘manual’ on how not to allow pictures of our servicemen returning in the belly of a C-130 from Iraq.

  8. ekaton

    I knew the republic was doomed, without radical counter-action, when the first “free speech zones” were designated during the political conventions in 2000. EXCUSE ME, but free speech is allowed on ANY public ground according to the constitution.

    Kent Shaw

  9. Jellicoe

    A good article. But it gives the Washington regime too much credit. They do not wish only to keep protest out of the Decider’s view (he could give a shit what people think of him). They wish to keep, and usually succeed in keeping, all dissent out of the view of the cameras and, therefore, the consciousness of the vast TV-viewing public. Witness the fact that cameras were not allowed within several blocks of the route that Bush took when he last visited London. No doubt this was occasioned, in part, by the fact that the Pres was videotaped being deluged with thrown food on his way to his first inauguration. But they needn’t worry –no one knew about that, either, because the establishment press (who undoubtedly had their cameras rolling) refused to even report on it, much less air the footage. We had to wait for an indy producer to display what we all should have been able to know as a matter of right as citizens of a supposed democracy. But we seem to be anesthetized to such anti-democratic rot by the sheer volume of the assaults on liberty and citizenship that are heaped on the country every day that the Washington regime continues to exercise its illegitate and outrageously abused power.

  10. Richard94611

    Somewhere above Bryan commented about the way the country is sinking into a Hollywood mentality. Hey, folks, do you remember how deeply we were into this just before 9/11, and how for a few months afterwards the whole tone of the nation changed? People started thinking about family, friends, right and wrong, etc. Well, I guess it didn’t stick because as Bryan has noted we’re once again sinking back into a swamp of self-centered frivolity.

  11. yarply

    Sorta old news.

    Saw a story about this stuff months ago on a “conspiracy” site.

    I’m just surprised that it took this long to show up somewhere else though. The thing is,, what can or will anyone do about stuff like this. Talk.

  12. SEAL

    I remember when I was a child, my father and grandfather answering my questions and explaining to me how people like Hitler and Stalin were able to gain power and control their nation and get the people to allow them to become such absolute dictators. I remember how I considered those nation’s people to be so stupid to allow it to happen. Now I’m watching it happen in my own country.

    Control the public information. Arrange it so that the people see and hear only what you want them to. That is what any dictator must do in order to gain the power and keep it long enough to impliment the necessary mechanisms that will make it possible for them to maintain their power by fear and force alone.

    During Reagan’s first term the Bush led gang of one world coporate rule dreamers got congress to deregulate media ownership. I warned everyone who would listen what that could mean. They all said I was nuts. Guess what? The would became could and soon we had a media under the control of a facist corporate empire that has used it to take control of this nation. This one simple thing has made it possible to destroy the constitutional protections of the american people and establish the mechanisms to maintain power by force.

    Very few of the citizens of this nation know this. They better wake up to the fact very soon or it will be too late to retake our liberty without a mass and bloody rebellion.