Larry Flynt's Blog, page 21

Regarding the "OCCUPY WALL STREET" Movement

It started when a bunch of college kids, responding to a tweet, descended on Wall Street. They stayed, and the crowd grew. Now there are thousands of them, and they're not just in New York City anymore. Nor is the movement still limited to undergrads. In a nation where 1% of the population controls almost half of the wealth, these protesters have chosen to call themselves the 99 Percent. They are the working class, the poor, the disenfranchised. They represent everyone excluded from a political process that has been hijacked by corporations and multimillionaires. The 99 Percent want their government back. This looks and feels like something different. It feels organic. It reminds me of the 1960s' antiwar movement. A long-simmering undercurrent of unrest in our country is now bubbling to the surface. Our politicians ignore this movement at their peril.

As Bob Dylan said, "The times they are a-changin'."

Larry Flynt: Ultimate Recognition

Larry Flynt was awestruck after seeing his name on the American National Tree for the first time during a recent visit to the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia. As a courageous defender of the First Amendment, Flynt has been honored with a plaque on the monument, which pays tribute to 100 Americans—both famous and obscure—whose actions have helped safeguard the U.S. Constitution. We sat down with Larry to discuss his thoughts on being part of such select company and why freedom of speech is so important.

HUSTLER: How did it feel to see your name on the American National Tree?

LARRY FLYNT: It was pretty exciting. I had heard that it was there, but I didn't realize what a big deal it was, so I never gave it that much thought. Sidney Poitier, the actor who's a friend of mine, had told me four or five years ago that it was there. I was in Philadelphia on my [One Nation Under Sex ] book tour, so I thought I'd go to the Constitution Center and take a look. It was really kind of a strange experience because the curator didn't charge us the cover charge, and everyone was fussing over us the whole time. I couldn't quite understand what this was about until the curator took me to the very middle of the Constitution Center, where they had this exhibit called the American National Tree.

Tell us about the exhibit.

It was an electronic monument with the inscription "This monument is dedicated to 100 people who advanced and protected the Constitution of the United States of America." And if you press a button where your name is, a big video explodes— one foot by two foot wide—and it has pictures of you. It also has a bio spelling out the different reasons why you were selected to be on the tree. Well, selected is really not the process because I asked the curator, "Who decides who the 100 names are?"

He said, "It's done by scholars and several universities around the country. You can only put one name on once a year, and consequently one name gets taken off. But you don't ever have to worry about your name coming off."

Were you included in the first 100 honorees when the Constitution Center opened in 2003?

Yes, and I was really overwhelmed about it because it's such a significant part of history. You're right in the center of where it all happened. I said to the curator, "Why are you guys making such a big deal of me being here?" He said, "Well, Mr. Flynt, most of those people up there are dead. So they're not gonna come. But you're alive." It was a very moving experience. I would have gone there and visited much sooner if I'd known the extent of the display.

Who are you next to on the tree?

Katharine Graham, who was the owner of the Washington Post , for her role in Watergate. And Frederick Douglass, the first black man invited to the White House, who was an author and advocate for civil rights. I'm right between those two.

Is the tree part of a larger exhibit?

Yes. There's a room where the Constitution was drafted. The center has life-size bronzes of George Washington, John Adams and Benjamin Franklin, three of our Founding Fathers. These bronzes are just so realistic, it's unbelievable. You get this humbling feeling as you go through the center and realize all the history that took place there. It's overwhelming.

The tree is located right in the heart of Constitution Center. It is the main display. You would have thought the Founding Fathers— the drafters of the Constitution—would have been front and center in the exhibit, but they aren't. They're in a side room. I'm not questioning why the Constitution Center did it, but the tree was right there, a living, breathing, interactive piece of history.

Why is protecting the First Amendment so important to you?

Without the First Amendment, nothing else is of any importance at all. If the First Amendment goes, we lose everything. Not just freedom of speech but freedom of religion. It's the cornerstone of our whole democracy, and it's withstood the test of time in many court cases down through the years. That's why I've been proud to be a part of upholding the First Amendment. Many people don't understand that freedom of speech is not the freedom for the thought you love. It's the freedom for the thought you hate the most. We pay a price to live in a free society, and that price is toleration. We have to tolerate things that we don't necessarily like so we can be free. And that's what most Americans don't understand.

If you go out and take a poll and ask people, "Do you believe in free speech," 98% of them will say they do. Then ask them, "How about pornography? How about flag burning? How about hate speech?" All of a sudden your almost 100% support falls to below 50% because everybody has their own vision of what the First Amendment is supposed to be, what kind of speech it's supposed to protect. That's why it really needs to be protected because the courts and individuals throughout history and even today are attempting to compromise the First Amendment every chance they get.

Are these limitations to the First Amendment the most pressing free speech issue in America right now?

We had a former Supreme Court justice who said the First Amendment is not absolute. You can't scream "Fire!" in a crowded theater. Well, I happen to think he's wrong. I think you can scream "Fire!" in a crowded theater. If anyone is hurt as a result of your doing that, then that's the crime you should be prosecuted for. I'm an absolutist. I'm a purist when it comes to the First Amendment. I just don't think we should compromise it in any way.

But compromise is just part of it. There's also outright abuse. If certain political leaders had their way about it, there wouldn't be a First Amendment. You would just shut up and do things their way. That's the way they play the game.

You're known for pushing the envelope and taking risks. Are there aspects of free speech even you wouldn't touch?

Of course there are. I would never exploit children because you're violating the rights of someone not old enough to speak for themselves. But I think that's a crime totally separate from the First Amendment.

A lot of people try to put everybody on a guilt trip about the First Amendment by saying, for example, hate speech violates the rights of others. Well, there are laws to protect the rights of others. The First Amendment should not be caught in a web because it's purely free speech.

You've obviously accomplished much in your life. Is there anything you haven't done and want to do?

Accomplishing what I did in Philadelphia—it's difficult to outdo that. It's almost the equivalent to being honored on Mount Rushmore.

What do you want your legacy to be?

Being remembered as someone who fought to expand the parameters of free speech in a good way. I think that would be a great legacy.

IT'S STILL THE ECONOMY, STUPID!

I'm worried the U.S. economy is about to slowdown drastically. President Obama should be worried too. The signs are not good: The housing market is at its lowest since 2002, the national unemployment rate remains above 9%, and job creation is static. On top of that, the President seems ready to make massive budget cuts just to accommodate the Republicans. That will further weaken the economy.

Had Obama pushed for a larger stimulus package and stiffer regulation of Wall Street, we wouldn't be in such deep shit now. One thing's for certain: If the economy tanks, even Bozo the Clown could beat the President in 2012.

Obama will need a lot of luck to get out of this mess. So will the American people.

A WARNING FROM THOMAS JEFFERSON

When it came to setting up our government, Thomas Jefferson had three concerns: tyranny of kings, tyranny of theocrats and tyranny of the wealthy. For the time being we seem to be safe from kings and theocrats. We are not, however, safe from the superrich.

Here's what Jefferson said: "I believe the banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered." The bankers and corporations have bought and paid for our politicians, both on the Left and the Right. That's why our elected representatives stand mute when it comes to defending the rights of working- class Americans.

It's time to heed Jefferson's words. It's time to fight back.

OCCUPY L.A. RAIDED BY LAPD

Report by Jordan David

November 30, 2011

Shortly after midnight a militarized police contingent, working with ruthless efficiency, evicted the occupants of the park around L.A.'s City Hall. The operation included approximately 1,800 members of the LAPD, plus officers from the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department. Defiant protesters, hoping for an influx of supporters to stand in opposition to this massive show of force, were stymied when police shut down streets and highway off-ramps. Over 200 protesters were arrested.

While the mainstream media is largely reporting that the eviction was Peaceful, with the police acting in a restrained, professional manner, that was only true of the City Hall area, where the sectioned-off press

representatives were allowed to observe the takedown. Those brave enough to venture into the streets witnessed police swinging billy clubs at peaceful demonstrators simply because they refused to get onto the sidewalks.

The nationwide Occupy movement was launched in response to the growing income disparity between America's rich and the working class. The protesters, who call themselves the 99%, recognize that the playing field is not level and that our politicians are owned by the 1%. It is a fact that the 400 wealthiest people in this country have more money then the bottom 150 million.

A complete report on the Occupy L.A. eviction, plus those in New York City and Denver, will appear in a future issue of HUSTLER Magazine.

Photo caption: Penned in press observe policeman arresting protester./Photo by Jordan David

Occupy Oakland

Did the police provoke the peaceful crowd at Occupy Oakland? Watch the video and decide…

10/25/2011

"The police line prevented any movement of the marches further and then as you can see in the video the sudden unprovoked rush by the police into the crowd. This was at about 5pm on Tuesday 10/25/2011. This was the first use of force by the police on this infamous night. An hour or so later the use of tear gas and flash grenades was again used on broadway which severely injured the marine veteran." – Occupier

INTERVIEW WITH ARRESTED PROTESTERS

OCT. 12. 2011

EXCLUSIVE TO HUSTLER: Reporter Jordan David, at the "Occupy Wall Street"

protest, interviews one of the two young men detained by New York City

police prior to the arrest of the couple seen in the previous video. (See

the video below.)

WALL STREET: BREAKING NEWS

BREAKING NEWS: Hustler reporter Jordan David, on the scene at today's "Occupy Wall Street" protest video taped an apparent act of unnecessary police aggression. According to David the NYPD officer ordered an older female demonstrator to move along, then repeatedly shoved her apparently because she wasn't moving fast enough in the jam packed crowd. When the woman's male companion came to her defense both the man and woman were hustled off by the officer, presumably to be arrested.

Just prior to this incident, two college age men were arrested and hustled away from the crowd. As this was happening the marching protesters came to a stop to see what had happened. That's when the police moved in on the older woman and her companion.

FREE-SPEECH CHAMPION NIXES FBI GRAND JURY

WITH OBAMA'S BLESSINGS, OUTSPOKEN U.S. CITIZENS ARE BEING TARGETED FOR AN INQUISITION BEFITTING A DICTATORSHIP.

By Nat Hentoff

From HUSTLER MAGAZINE July 2011

Since the twilight of George W. Bush's regime, the FBI has become, like the CIA, a force that doesn't have to pay any attention to the Constitution. While the CIA operates in secrecy, it is public knowledge that the FBI's Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide—now also fully supported by President Obama and his lapdog, Attorney General Eric Holder—gives the bureau the power to open "threat assessment" investigations of any American without any factual basis, suspicion of wrongdoing or connection to any foreign entity. J. Edgar Hoover would be so envious of the present FBI director, Robert Mueller.

Mike German, a former FBI antiterrorism agent now on the staff of the American Civil Liberties Union, points out that these FBI home and office invasions scoop up "address books, computer records, literature and advocacy materials—First Amendment sort of materials."

On September 24, 2010, in one of its continuous "assessment" raids, the FBI barged into the homes and offices of nonviolent dissenters—antiwar, human rights, labor and other activists—in Chicago, Minneapolis and elsewhere in the Midwest.

These privacy and First Amendment invaders served grand jury subpoenas as they left. One of those summoned, Maureen Murphy (a journalist and advocate of Palestinian solidarity), issued a patriotic defiance of the FBI on CommonDreams.org: "Activism Is Not a Crime: Why I Will Not Testify Before This Federal Grand Jury."

Murphy notes that she was targeted "as part of an investigation into 'material support for foreign terrorist organizations.' No crime has been identified. No arrests have been made. And…the FBI acknowledged that there is no immediate threat to the American public. So what is this investigation really about?"

It could only be a synchronized intent by the Obama Administration—like its predecessor—to tamp down dissent of national security policies so that Obama will stay in office. Recovering somewhat from the Democrats' defeats in the midterm elections, this commander in chief clearly plans to preside over a second term.

Speaking like a reincarnation of Tom Paine, Murphy refuses to be intimidated: "The U.S. government doesn't need to call me before a grand jury to learn my activities and my beliefs. I have often appealed to my elected representatives to take a principled stand on foreign-policy issues, protested outside federal buildings and have written countless articles over the years that can be easily found through a Google search."

Along with Maureen Murphy, 22 other targets of those particular FBI raids were issued grand jury subpoenas last September, and, so far, they too have refused to testify.

Their assertion of quintessential Constitutional Americanism has to be understood by the rest of us in the context of a deep December 10, 2010, Washington Post investigative report.

"Monitoring America" by Pulitzer Prize-winner Dana Priest, along with William Arkin, has received far too little attention—and no Congressional action!

I write about this report as masses of courageous Egyptian protesters celebrate their removal of longtime dictator Hosni Mubarak by welcoming the arrival of long dreamed of democracy.

Consider, however, the state of our own democracy as documented in "Monitoring America": "The United States is assembling a vast domestic intelligence apparatus to collect information about Americans, using the FBI, local police, state Homeland Security offices and military criminal investigators.

"The system, by far the largest and most technologically sophisticated in the nation's history, collects, stores and analyzes information about thousands of U.S. citizens and residents, many of whom have not been accused of any wrongdoing. The government's goal is to have every state and local law enforcement agency in the country feed information to Washington to buttress the work of the FBI, which is in charge of terrorism investigations in the United States." The Fourth Amendment to the Bill of Rights has been extrajudicially suspended.

Would Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Samuel Adams, Benjamin Franklin and the other Founders recognize this as the United States? Do you? And did you know what Maureen Murphy eagerly discloses: "Witnesses called to testify to a grand jury have no right to have a lawyer in the room, and the jury is handpicked by government prosecutors with no screening for bias. It is the ultimate abuse of power for a citizen to be forced to account to the government for no other reason than her exercise of Constitutionally protected freedoms of speech and association."

This unintimidated American pledges that "even though it means I risk being jailed for the life of the grand jury, I will not be appearing before it."

Will the President, now seeking reelection in 2012, award Murphy—and her fellow resisters to grand jury subpoenas—the Presidential Liberty Medal? You can be sure that Barack Obama will not. Egyptians went out to the streets in waves of historic numbers to be free. How free of government spying on us are we citizens of the United States of America? Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black warned us: "We must not be afraid to be free."

At the conclusion of the 1787 Constitutional Convention, Benjamin Franklin was asked by a newly minted American, "What have you given us?"

"A republic," Franklin answered, "if you can keep it." We are fast losing our grip.

————————————————–

Nat Hentoff is a historian of the Constitution, a jazz critic and a columnist for the Village Voice and Free Inquiry. His incisive books include The First Freedom:The Tumultuous History of Free Speech in America; Living the Bill of Rights; and the forthcoming Is This America?

Wall Street Protests

Whether on the left or the right, I don't see how anyone could have a problem with this movement. It's the banks that caused the economic problems we are currently suffering through. It was their actions which forced us to bail them out with our tax payer dollars. How did they repay us? By continuing to do exactly what they did when they caused our economy to collapse in the first place. It's called casino capitalism. They're raking in billions of dollars while giving nothing back. They are, in fact, sucking the wealth out of our country and into their pockets. And our bought and paid for politicians on both sides of the aisle are letting them get away with it. Actually, they are helping them get away with it. If I was twenty years younger I'd be down there with the protesters myself.

I watch the CNN Sunday news shows every weekend. Not one of them mentioned the events on Wall Street this past Sunday even though a mind boggling 700 protesters had been arrested a day earlier. Shame on them.

– Bruce David/Hustler Editorial Director