You’re going to put up with what the law allows councilman! The police will not even listen to you.

 

Councilman says everyone’s views will be respected and allowed to speak without interruption, then proceeds to interrupt and disrespect the citizen. A coward and a tyrannical hypocrite.

This needs to be taught and instilled to our children, and repeated over and over by grown adults: “the price of freedom is eternal vigilance…”

 

 

This is absolutely atrocious. His right to address his government is being stomped on. I appreciate that the police did not prevent him from speaking but they should have gone further and had this disruptive councilman removed. He had no right to behave this way. It’s his job to shut up and listen to the people. This country is just completely off the rails. The inmates are running the asylum and the majority of our citizens have no clue or concern. It’s so frightening.

 

 

Unlawful to interrupt a citizen in a public forum once they begin their allotted time. This Councilman should know this, so should the officers. There is no “back and forth” or debating during public forum. What a slimeball., file an injunction against the entire board. That was despicable.

 

He’s NOT ALLOWED to interrupt public comments. The public has a statutory right to comment on public policy UNMOLESTED.
Like this dude is literally asserting himself as a despot and attempting to silence people. When this is seen there should be IMMEDIATE ACTION.
The real story here was the guy sitting in the back of the room, trying to get the guy speaking thrown out, so an officer made him sit down and stood next to him to intimidate him! Lol!
Purpose of meetings is for the public to voice out grievances!!! SO the government MUST LISTEN CAREFULLY AND FULLY SO THE PUBLIC WILL BE SATISFY OF WHERE TAXPAYERS GOES AND FOR WHAT IT IS SPENT!!!!
“Everyone should be protected unless you’re going to criticize me” is what he was trying to say
Blatantly interrupting and not allowing the member of the public to speak openly. Just because he doesn’t like what is being said he doesn’t have the power to be the only person to speak uninterrupted. He is abusing his power.
The COURT actually said he could NOT post on social MEDIA???? WTF? You only need watch this councilman react to earned criticism with an attempt to overstep his authority as well as VIOLATE HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.
i like how the council member talks about respect but have no clue what respect means , also complains about being intrupted but then intrupts him , open mic mean FREE SPEACH. and also WELL DONE cops upholding this guys rights
I’ve called “points of order” in two different commission meetings (one city and one county) and both were actually handled appropriately.
What a crooked city council, nobody says anything about this man’s rights, shame, disgrace, dirty councilman.
If they’re doing this criminal action in plain view what are they doing behind closed doors….???
The councilman doesn’t understand that his feelings mean absolutely nothing and he’s clearly disregarding case law and federal law. This man needs to be voted out of his position and charged for suppressing his 1st amendment right as well as stopping his time to take a break cause they did t like what was being said, these people are spineless and ignorant beyond belief. These officers need to stop approaching the man speaking trying to intimidate him to stop. Please file an injunction against the meeting and members.
When a councilman thinks he’s in charge of everything instead of working FOR the people
Christo needs to do this the next time they pull that shit, state plainly on camera the following verbatim. “By interrupting my time you’ve violated my rights and standing case law, and have committed felonies under 18 USC 241 and 242. At this time every member before me who has acted to prevent me from speaking during the period of public commentary is under citizen’s arrest and hereby remanded into the custody of the officers standing in session and witness to the aforementioned crimes.” The officers will have no other choice but to arrest every council member in the room.
Absolutely runs away on this guy’s of a recess just to shut him up since the cops wouldn’t remove him
I would have demanded my 6 uninterrupted 6 minutes. Why does the council hear personal attacks but the speaker is describing actions done or not done by the council. Calling them names just plays into their hands. You have reams of actions by these people. Use that to your benefit. No matter what you use to describe them honestly still slows your cause. Constructive argument and FACTS. My granny used to say “Kill”em with kindness“. Sounds kind of simple but you cant fight someone who is smiling and speaking in a harmonious tone as your words cuts them with a thousand cuts. I’ve never mastered it. I tend to go straight at it then let my wife tear them a new one.
Isn’t Joshi the guy who had his uncle take the blame for pulling campaign signs from peoples yards; and he still got elected mayor? The “dumbing down is real.
Funny how the cops came over to Christo, instead of going after the Councilman that is breaking the law.
I don’t understand how the court can prohibit a person from posting on YouTube while their case is pending, I imagine that stipulation is part of the bond agreement. That being said, others can post whatever that stipulation keeps him from posting.
The saddest thing about this meeting is that there were no other speakers and only one crazy person in the room in the corner. We are doomed!
Why are the cops not taking the council member to jail for breaking the law.
Public comments do not have to be about the business at hand. These people are truly corrupt. We all need to start going to all city council meetings. The shit they do there is astonishing.
Mayor has a bathroom break directly after a recess…imagine that
Mayor has a bathroom break directly after a recess…imagine that
He need’s to get his minute’s back’ The constant interruptions & threats to have him removed 😡😡
The cops ain’t gonna waste time for a pointless arrest again. He never gets charged in the end so why do it.
Voicing grievances is allowed. But I find if you do it with respect and not contempt, it speeds the success of resolve.

European Law prohibits filming the police in Davos

 

Saagar takes viewers through the agenda of the 2022 World Economic Forum held in Davos that made speech restriction and controls on free speech central to the agenda for the world to see

Original: YouTube

Video Comments

  • During a 2018 trip to Italy, our tour guide in Florence told us to be careful not to take any photos of the police who were patrolling around the historical monuments. He said specifically “this is not America – this is not a free country. if they see you take their picture, they will confiscate your camera or phone and they will not return it. you don’t have rights here” It was pretty eye opening.
    Censorship isn’t designed to combat disinformation, it’s designed to combat dissent.
  • “Recalibration of a whole range of human rights.” No.
  •  Right. The irony is that while you can’t film anyone without their consent, the overlords will be recording your every move using facial recognition software in fully automated cities.
  • If it wasn’t for Sagaar I wouldn’t have found out that the WEF is in fact a privately owned organisation, that peddles (and makes lots of money from) providing corporate access to government officials. I am grateful he’s pointed out what an Australian government official has said at DAVOS because its NOT being covered here at all.

 

More Research:

I wanted to know whether Sagaar was reporting an isolated incident or taking things out of context so I did more research.  Here are some of the top search results for:

 

What the Law Says About Filming the Police in Europe

In some countries, moves are afoot to curtail documenting police actions.

Spain in 2015 enacted the Citizen Security Law (better known as the gag law) that threatens a hefty fine for the unauthorized publication and dissemination of images of the police.

In Belgium, a video blogger is appealing a €300 fine imposed by a court for filming and uploading two police officers’ response to an incident at a café, which in the court’s view violated their privacy. The Belgian interior minister is reportedly considering a formal legal ban.

The lower house of the Dutch parliament recently adopted a motion calling for a change in the law that would result in the prohibition of the publication of recognizable images of police officers.

.. The right to film or photograph the police is a key safeguard of human rights and civil liberties in situations, particularly in situations that present a high risk of violations, such as stop-and-search operations, identity checks, or protests. Activists have argued that filming the police in action is a way to de-escalate tensions and potential violence, as the police officer is forced to behave in accordance with the law. Where abuses do occur, victims often find their version of events will not be believed unless video and photo evidence are available to support their claim against the police.

 

Can I film the police in Germany?

There is no exception for police officers1, 2. The rules described above also apply to them1. You can’t share photos or videos of police officers without getting their permission or blurring their faces.

What happens if I don’t follow the rules?

The punishment is a fine, or up to 2 years in prison1, 2. People rarely go to prison, but fines and lawsuits are common1. In some cases, your camera can be confiscated1.

The subject of the photo can sue for damages1. They have 3 years to do this1. The 3 year period starts from the last time the picture was distributed1. Both the photographer and the publisher (including websites) can be sued1. You might have to pay for the victim’s legal costs1, 2.

Can I just blur people’s faces?

No. You must make sure that the person can’t be recognised1. For example, tattoos, clothes, hair styles and jewellery can be used to recognise a person, even if their face is blurred1.

 

The new French law that restricts photos and videos of police officers

What is the bill?

The proposed law, Loi relative à la sécurité globale (law on global security) is a major piece of security legislation covering issues regarding policing in France, several of which have drawn criticism.

.. Most controversial is the bill’s clause 24, which would criminalise the publishing of any photos or videos where a police officer or gendarme could be recognised, if there is an intent to harm their “physical or psychological integrity”.

It’s similar to a bill that came before the parliament in the spring, which failed to pass, but this time it has been backed by the Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin.

“My job as interior minister is to protect those who protect us,” Darmanin told BFMTV.

“I had made a promise, that it would no longer be possible to broadcast the image of the police and gendarmes on social media. That promise will be kept,” the interior minister said.

more: politico.eu

 

European Union Court finding:

The defendant, Sergejs Buivids, made a video recording inside a Latvian police station whilst he was there giving a statement in connection with administrative proceedings that had been initiated against him. The video showed the police facilities and a number of police officers going about their duties. Mr Buivids then published the video on YouTube.

 

.. Further, there is no express exception in the Directive excluding the processing of personal data of public officials, and case law shows that the fact that information is provided as part of a professional activity does not mean that it cannot be characterised as “personal data”.

According to case law, “journalistic activities” are those that have as their purpose the disclosure to the public of information, opinions or ideas, irrespective of the medium used to transmit them.

The CJEU said that it was for the referring court to determine whether “journalistic activities” applied here, but the CJEU could still provide guidance.

The question for the Latvian court was whether the sole purpose of the recording and publication of the video was the disclosure to the public of information, opinions or ideas. To that end, it should take into account Mr Buivids’s argument that the video was published online to draw attention to alleged police malpractice, which he claimed occurred while he was making his statement. However, establishing malpractice was not a condition for the applicability of Article 9.

In this case, the CJEU said, it was possible that the recording and publication of the video, which took place without the persons concerned being informed, amounted to interference with their right to privacy.

 

 

Filming Police on Duty in the UK

The police have no power to stop you filming or photographing officers on duty. Recording film footage on a police incident, or taking photographs of their actions, is not illegal.

But, you must follow some basic guidelines..

 

Some English photographers have been stopped and searched using the “terrorism” loophole.

European Law prohibits filming the police in Davos

Saagar takes viewers through the agenda of the 2022 World Economic Forum held in Davos that made speech restriction and controls on free speech central to the agenda for the world to see

 

 

Censorship isn’t designed to combat disinformation, it’s designed to combat dissent.
The fact that they call it a conspiracy even tho they’re coming out and saying what their intentions are is just weird
This is a perfect example of DC journalist minds set. People reporting on World Economic Forum were labeled Conspiracy Theorists because it was the easier way to discredit them. Not everyone reporting on this is a Alex Jones wanna be 😂
“Recalibration of a whole range of human rights.” No.
During a 2018 trip to Italy, our tour guide in Florence told us to be careful not to take any photos of the police who were patrolling around the historical monuments. He said specifically “this is not America – this is not a free country. if they see you take their picture, they will confiscate your camera or phone and they will not return it. you don’t have rights here” It was pretty eye opening.
>> The US gov’t confiscates property here too. We are just not at their level yet.
>> Same thing in Greece.
>> Try filming a cop in Mexico.
>> So basically….get caught filming a cop in Italy – lose a $1000 phone. Get caught filming and or just releasing US soldiers commit war crimes – lose a 1000 years of your freedom.

>>  @Keith D.  Right. The irony is that while you can’t film anyone without their consent, the overlords will be recording your every move using facial recognition software in fully automated cities. Minority Report was a sci-fi preview of what they have been working on for years now.

PLEASE SAAGAR. Read into Central Bank Digital Currency. There was a full speech on it at Davos, as well as a 200 page published paper and a Federal Reserve Paper. The battle of Free Speech will be fought on CBDCs. You can lose your ability to buy/sell certain goods and services with centralized digital currencies.
Actually, there is no such law. You’re allowed to film police as long as it does not impede their work and they are allowed to ask you to stop if they feel that it does (which is of course open to abuse, but that’s a different conversation). Other than that you are free to do so. Hate to say it Saagar but you should research more before making wild claims (which you rightly demand of many other journalists)
How is wanting to redraw the lines of our basic human rights not a Reset?
To be fair she didn’t just say “recalibrate freedom of speech”, she was saying to recalibrate the whole spectrum, from freedom of speech on one end to freedom from harm on the other
Sagaar is absolutely right in so much of this and yet utterly wrong on some details. I’m Australian and I am so grateful he’s been one of the few journalists to have reported on the WEF and their garbage. If it wasn’t for Sagaar I wouldn’t have found out that the WEF is in fact a privately owned organisation, that peddles (and makes lots of money from) providing corporate access to government officials. I am grateful he’s pointed out what an Australian government official has said at DAVOS because its NOT being covered here at all. Without Sagaar I wouldn’t know these things. I am absolutely with him on free speech, but with a proviso that willful misinformation campaigns that cause damage are policed. I’d think he’d agree there’s a problem with who and how polices what’s misinformation along with determining if it was deliberate. BUT THAT SHITTY line about people being locked up in Australia for testing positive is so dead wrong. We DID NOT lock people up in camps for testing positive. That never happened, and its damned insulting to hear it again. I had someone shove that at me yesterday. When the outbreak started we had 1000s of people caught outside the country and many in countries where COVID was out of control. When we started letting people back in it was on the provision that they spent 14 days in quarantine. When people broke quarantine like they did in July 2020 we had 500 deaths from it. We tightened up the rules and for almost a year had very few deaths. The we relaxed those rules, Omicron got lose, selfish people went nuts and we went from under 1000 to over 8000 dead. Yes Sagaar for letting a few SELFISH people get their way we lost 7,000 lives. Its like the 19 dead children and their 2 teachers in Texas because a few SELFISH people get their way. Its just like these SELFISH people in Davos who want their way which is “the elites decide everything because they know better.”
We have some pretty strict laws about recording others her in California but we have this concept called a reasonable expectation of privacy that limit recording at those times but still allow for recording in public places. I don’t think it should get any stricter than that and, at the very least, it’s very important to be able to film public officials when they are doing the jobs that we, as a society, have asked them to do for us, such as how police treat the citizens, among other things.
They have the largest CCTV system and they are uncomfortable on camera 😂
This is completely incorrect. You’re perfectly allowed to film someone in public without their consent in Europe. Just not post it if they’re recognisable and specifically refused to consent.
Davos Man by Peter S. Goodman is a great book if anyone is looking for further reading on the Davos Crowd.

Cops arrested him for filming in public, but things took a bizarre turn when the case went to court

 

The arrest of a Texas cop watcher for filming in public is the most recent chilling example of how law enforcement across the country is attempting to roll back auditors’ First Amendment rights. Jack Miller, also known as Texas Sheepdog, was filming outside the Olmos Park, Texas, City Hall when police arrested and charged him with multiple crimes. The ensuing five-day trial and jury verdict reveal that citizens’ ability to film in public is facing new obstacles and concerted pushback from the government.

 

 

He should have immediately filed an appeal and had his sentence stayed a federal judge would have looked at that video and put a halt to the entire sentence
Assault on a Police Officer? He never touched them. Or Is hurting their fragile feelings by cursing at them a Federal Offense?
Maybe if the police stopped making frivolous arrest, they wouldn’t have to worry about charges being dropped. The police need to know and understand the law!
…Let me get this straight. He went out to film a PSA about not threatening cops, only to have the cops brutally assault him trying to help cops. The Irony in this story is off the charts. 📈🤦🏿
It would be interesting to hear the jury instructions. Should be appealed.
I have to believe that that jury had no idea what they were doing I saw nothing of what they charged him with.
This is a prime example of how our justice system is not about right or wrong but about money and power and ego’s
I’m surprised they aren’t drug testing you twice per day! (They charge you $30.00 each time!) Its a money racket… Financial extortion! Probation is far worse than serving the time … (Never accept probation!) – Michael B. Saari for Michigan State Senate 2022
He needs to get himself a lawyer who knows what the law is. Being a retired lawyer I cannot believe that he was convicted
how in the hell did a trial get the majority of the the jurors to have a guilty plea? it is SUPER clear to me that he wasnt resisting, and VERY clear that he did not attack a police officer and the fact that it was a toy gun not an actual fire arm means how did they tack on a fire arm charge with no fire arm? this sounds EXTREMLY fishy to me ( meaning like corruption )
>> Yeah, the gun charges got me as well… isn’t this in an open carry state and that was a toy rifle SLUNG over his back? Not very menacing.
Weaponized law enforcement. Imagine that.
I’m wondering how a jury can find you guilty of resisting arrest when there was no crime committed. Resisting arrest is a secondary charge. I would say I want another jury trial with new jury members, as seeing as those jurors must be incredibly incompetent. There was no crime to begin with, so how was resisting arrest of a crime that was never committed? 2nd Amendment? That’s not a crime. Blocking a pathway? Didnt see him blocking anyone. And assault on a peace officer!?!?!? Where in this video does it show this man lay a single finger on these cops!?!?!?!? Except maybe he pulled away from them when THEY TRIED TO GRAB HIM!!! And they tackled him to the ground, pulled his arm behind his back essentially breaking it to where he needed surgery 2 days later, hes laying there crying in pain, and they charged him with Assault on a peace officer!?!?!? Get the fuck outta here dude!!! So even though he had a fake gun (Even if real, we still have 2nd amendment), was not blocking a single person on the sidewalk, didnt commit a crime at all, and was the one brutally tackled to the ground and had his arm broken, he is still somehow found guilty on all charges? What video did these jurors see, because I see the complete opposite of these charges. Once again, to recap… Fake Gun, blocking no one’s movement, didnt lay a single finger on either of those cops, no crime committed, and being the victim of assault and battery and hes still charged with disorderly (Possibly Brandishing with intent to harm), blocking pathway, assault on peace officer, and resisting arrest!?!?!?!?!? What kind of a system are we in where we find our fellow man guilty at the hands of the corrupts crimes? I’m scared to live in this society. I dont want today’s corruption and abuse to be my future….

Show less