Skip to comments.Flags burn in celebration
Posted on 07/04/2006 3:31:16 PM PDT by RetroSexual
About 25 revelers celebrated their freedom of speech and welcomed the Fourth of July on Monday night with the "2nd Annual Old Time American Flag Burn."
Around a burn barrel at Seabright State Beach, organizer Brent Adams, 41, of Santa Cruz, declared flag burning not a protest, but a celebration of the Constitution's First Amendment.
"It seemed like a good idea to burn some flags just because we can," added fellow organizer Sha Lar, 32, of Santa Cruz.
The festivities were especially relevant after a constitutional amendment allowing Congress to ban flag desecration died in the Senate last week.
That proposal came in response to Supreme Court rulings in 1989 and 1990 that burning and other desecrations of the flag are protected as free speech by the First Amendment.
But it failed by one vote in the Senate to reach the two-thirds approval required before going to the states for ratification.
"The Senate overruled it by one vote, and let's celebrate it," Lar said. Some at the celebration noted that in other countries, they could be shot for torching the national flag.
Poison Oak, 35, of Aptos, said he wanted to "reclaim the flag. Not only those who support President George W. Bush can wave the red white and blue."
Still, not everyone on the beach appreciated stars and stripes melting over the fire.
"I think they should keep it to themselves," said Bill Crawford, 16, of Aptos, who was on the beach with buddies Elijah Manchester and Jacob Kendall, both 16 and from Santa Cruz.
The trio looked away as flames consumed the large and small flags.
"To me this is what represents our nation and what represents our freedom," Manchester said. He questioned why the group would want to burn the symbol of free speech.
Despite their different views, those who didn't agree with flag burning were still welcome at the event, said Igliashon Jones, 23, of Santa Cruz. Free speech is what it was all about.
"I don't think this would be what it is without debate," Jones said.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
If they wanted demonstrate free speech, they should've burned other countries' flags where such activities are illegal or liable to get you taken behind your house and shot.
Burning the American flag as a demonstration of free speech is not a positive demonstration of free speech. In fact, it is just the opposite.
What an a-hole.
Some at the celebration noted that in other countries, they could be shot for torching the national flag.
So why not burn THOSE flags, since that protest would mean something, as opposed to burning the flag of the country that ALLOWS such a display? If you're truly looking to make a statement about freedom, why not burn the flag of a country that doesn't allow it, here?
said he wanted to "reclaim the flag. Not only those who support President George W. Bush can wave the red white and blue."
Notice that liberals are the ones who always bring this up? Supporters of the President never say "we're the only ones who can wave the flag." But the liberal pursuit of the Victim Pose is never-ending.
Burn in hell you anti-Americans!
But I'm sure that burning the Gay Pride flag in Santa Cruz is considered a hate crime.
They should have burned their underwear...while they were still wearing them!
He wants to 'wave the flag' by burning it.
I don't know about this guy -- but generally speaking, in my opinion, only a drug addled America hating scumbag could ever conceive of such a notion.
The article should have been footnoted that
"The Associated Press often contributes to this movement"
Maybe they will next time they have their head so far up their @ss that they can't see what they are doing!
Free speech? So I guess it's okay to burn the flags of France, Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea, and the PRC?
It's not called Kalifornia with their dream of Amerika for nothing.
"Because we can". This is so childish.
Notice that liberals are the ones who always bring this up? Supporters of the President never say "we're the only ones who can wave the flag."
Lefties had disassociated themselves from the flag for so long, that when it appeared to be everywhere after Sept 11, 2001, and they could not bully us into not wearing or waving it, they had to blame conservatives for the fact that they did not have any emotional or physical connection to the flag. So they started saying they were going to "take back the flag." Even politicians running for offices made this ridiculous statement in front of cameras and audiences.
They will never take responsibility for anything they do.
Like the Constititutional right to get drunk and stupid and blather out any idiot thing.
Remember, free speech != smart speech (or even relevant speech)
Too bad noboy used their free speech to put a hose on their flags before they could burn them.
That's what they want you to say. Every post to this thread is giving these mental midgets their jollies. "We're relevant!" they're thinking.
I'm sorry this article was printed--it's pure puffery--and I'm sorry it was posted. It will bring nothing but joy to these Rats.
Maybe they should try burning some crosses "just because they can" and see what happens....
There, I made a slight correction. BTW, Would it be a good idea for me to beat this little "Sha Lar" POS into a coma? I'm sure I can, so why not?
Notice how their "taking back the flag" thing never goes anywhere, because the reaction is "Who's stopping you from showing the flag?" And of course, after they periodically find their love of the flag, it's gone once the cameras aren't around, and they go right back to showing their "Peace" and "UN" and rainbow flags, which are the only ones they can really get behind. (yawn)
They'd respond by saying "But that symbolizes something we're against"...as opposed to burning the flag. A revealing attitude.
The amendment to stop this crap failed by one vote: and one of the voters against it was 12,000 year old Robert Byrd who is up for re-election. He might get re-elected, of course, because he in the King of Pork. However, whether he can vote next time remains to be seen. The other WV Senator had better sense and voted affirmative.
Of course the second annual flag burning may not be the last annual flag burning, but the burners will (a) be doing it elsewhere than in the U.S.; or (b)doing it here because they want some warm place where food is provided; or (c) they like the stories they have heard about prison homosexuality, or (d) they are just the harmless but nettlesome prickly pears who need something to do after sucking the bong all day, with a snort of coke as a chaser later in the early evening.
I was thinking the same thing. With names like Poison Oak and Sha Lar I bet they fly the rainbow flag.
Getting folks riled up is their goal...it apparently works...
Or could flag-burning be considered "hate speech" and therefore be subject to fine and imprisonment?
How about incitement to riot? Public burning without a permit?
Ah, much more fitting saying now.
Yes. I would hope the courts would agree. It should be treated the same as if it was a cross that was burned. Go burn a cross and see if anyone who attacks you is protected by the law. I'll bet no charges would be brought (unlike if it were a flag).
BUMP! to your post.
Still, it's funny to see them fight to "take back the flag" so they can burn it!
Barf alert! Those people make me sick!
What would their reaction have been if some one showed up with U.N. flags to burn?
Notice this is Santa-Cruz, Kommifornia.
You know, the same insane bunghole that elects avowed communist as mayor, the community that happily accepted Angela Davis a regent at the local university.
They've shown that they are idiots for all the world to see.
Wonderful idea. If I still live in the area next year, I'll give it a go.
Neal Boortz had an interesting idea. He said that flag burning should be allowed as a first amendment issue, and that we should make a federal law protecting flag burners which says anyone beating the crap out of a flag burner shall be arrested and fined one dollar.
"It seems like a good idea to kick these turds in the teeth just because we can," added Freeper Triggerhippie, 38, of St. Augustine.
I saw one man today at our town's Fourth of July parade, carrying two 'War is not the Answer' [white words on a UN blue background] signs. Boy, did he look out of place! He even looked a bit uncomfortable, just too many American flags and happy Americans for his 'sensibilities.'
People who want the UN to put the US in its place are idiots as far as I am concerned. I do not give them the time of day!
I wonder if smoking a cigarette in Santa Cruz is protected?
Poison Oak? Who the heck names their kid 'Poison'? Known to all three of his friends as 'Scratch'.
I wonder if they would be willing to put their lives on the line to defend the flag (and everything it stands for) if we were under attack ?
I would be tempted to toast the guy with a shot of Bacardi 151... right as he is lighting the flag... of course, if someone bumped my elbow and it landed all over him.. well, that is just tough, ain't it?
Agreed. Anyone with at least two functioning brain cells knows that the UN is totally incapable of ... well ... anything (with the possible exception of harboring vast corruption).
You have to view these people for what the are, Parasites.
Californians with entirely too much money and too much time on their hands. Think, what a horrible death it is to die a coward, and Santa Cruz, Aptos and Capitola are filled with people who will never be missed.
If he tried burning the flag in my town, his nickname would soon be "Stumpy".
That's a pretty good idea.
Just make sure that the anti-American Left gets plenty of exposure. The more Americans get their message, the faster the Left will drop into the oubliette of history where it belongs.
The only thing they have to do is burn the flag of their country for fun ?. If that is the only way they can celebrate a holiday like this is burn the flag they better take my advise , get a job , earn a living and better still get a life period!
""It seemed like a good idea to burn some flags just because we can," added fellow organizer Sha Lar, 32, of Santa Cruz."
'because we can'.....sounds like a 'Toonism.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.