Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
![[A protester is arrested during an anti-war protest at the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minn., Monday, Sept. 1, 2008. (AP Photo/C. Rex Arbogast)]](http://www.commondreams.org/files/article_images/protester.jpg "protester.jpg")
Bolstered by emergency help from the Minnesota National Guard,
police in St. Paul arrested 284 people Monday after outbreaks of
violence and road obstructions linked to rogue bands of demonstrators
among an otherwise peaceful throng estimated at 10,000 people.
The demonstrations, on a steamy first day of the Republican National Convention, began with block after block of marchers -- far fewer than the 50,000 some had predicted -- chanting and peacefully waving signs on downtown St. Paul's narrow streets. As the day wore on, the carnival atmosphere turned ugly.
Before most of the demonstrators had finished their march, a few hundred protesters splintered off and became confrontational and sometimes violent. Some smashed windows at Macy's and a downtown bank building. Others challenged police by blocking roads.
Late Monday, authorities said 130 of the 284 people arrested may face felony charges. Dozens were pepper-sprayed and tear-gassed. One police officer was punched in the back and another suffered from heat exhaustion. St. Paul emergency rooms reported nine minor injuries and several heat-related cases.
Hundreds of police officers, sweltering in heavy riot gear, swept in to block streets and protect delegate buses. About 3 p.m., St. Paul police requested help from 150 National Guard troops.
St. Paul Mayor Chris Coleman said officers showed restraint as a small number of law-breaking demonstrators marred an otherwise peaceful day of free speech.
"Their efforts were nothing short of heroic," Coleman said. "They did not fail. They did not take the bait."
But observers from the National Lawyers Guild took issue with police action.
"We think it's unconscionable. We think it's out of control," said Gina Berglund, an attorney and legal observer coordinator for the guild's Minnesota chapter. "The response by the police was completely out of proportion with what they were faced with."
154 Comments so far
Show AllWhat if both sides are right? Shouldn't you consider that possibility? Someone said they were a veteran of the 60's &70's protests and assure's us there were plenty of poluice agents undercover. There were certainly many instances of out of control behavior by protestors then. Why would it be different now?
Perhaps both sides were expecting the worst?
Here's the upcoming event they won't touch--they're afraid of the publicity!
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=xC0HauJ5-eQ
(warning: this video is upsetting)
For those who want to assist the arrested--
... CALL the jail administration at 651.266.9350 (#8 to speak w/ someone) and demand that people are given proper medical attention, are given access to their medication, and are not separated from the larger group! Also, demand that arrestees' charges are DROPPED and that they are RELEASED immediately!
You can also try the Ramsey County Sheriff's office at 651.487.5149 AND call the St. Paul Mayor's office at 651.266.8510.
Ramsey County Sheriff:
http://www.co.ramsey.mn.us/sheriff
651-266-7300 (Patrol)
651-266-9333 (LEC)
UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION
AMENDMENT l
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for the redress of grievances.
“Monday after outbreaks of violence and road obstructions linked to rogue bands of demonstrators”
Government Provocateurs?
Instead of gov't MIB,
___ make that Men in Brown ( they really stink )
Namaste
Disorderly conduct, imagine that.
The police actions in St. Paul are similar as to what happened in Denver. Police cornered those with permits and beat on them. Most police actions went unreported in the corporate press. Fascism is what it's called. No different than what we saw in Beijing. No protests allowed.
Beware the mainstream corporate press. They probably didn't show up at the demo when they compiled their facts, but they nonetheless write articles anyway.
I recommend trying to get news from an IndyMedia site. Here's a link to the Twin Cities IndyMedia.
-TIA
A growing number of individuals have researched and now question the official story of 9/11. Activist groups like We Are CHANGE have made this cause more visible and now have chapters in every state and many countries around the world.
Following this success, we want to make it known that 9/11 FIRST RESPONDERS NEED OUR HELP. All proceeds from these events will be donated to the FealGood Foundation, a non-profit organization dedicated to spreading awareness as to the catastrophic health effects on 9/11 first responders and helping to assist them.
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=xC0HauJ5-eQ
I live in the Twin Cities and nothing I've read/heard suggests to me that the police were out of control. On the contrary, there was a link on the Minneapolis Star Tribune web site which allowed a database search of recent arrests. Many of those charged with disorderly conduct/rioting/etc. were out-of-state "professional" activists. I wonder where they get their money, and who will post their bail. If they weren't paid provocateurs, they may as well have been.
I'm frankly sick and tired of the goddamned wedge-drawing between the stereotypical left-wing activist, the modern-day self-flagellator, city hall, local police, and pissing off ordinary people, Joe Sixpacks, fence-sitting Americans.
Doesn't anyone get it? We should be encouraging city halls to do what Vermont did -- issue an arrest if Bush/Cheney should visit, to encourage lower-level FBI to scrutinize their political superiors, to cause the break -- the wedge -- to appear far up the pipeline where it might actually expose something. Bickering among locals, among ordinary people, serves absolutely no purpose whatsoever. Getting pepper-sprayed in the face isn't the way to stop a war or get an illegal regime out of office. Beating yourself with a cat o' nine tails in the middle ages isn't the way to keep the plague at bay either.
twelvepax wrote:
Bickering among locals, among ordinary people, serves absolutely no purpose whatsoever. Getting pepper-sprayed in the face isn't the way to stop a war or get an illegal regime out of office. Beating yourself with a cat o' nine tails in the middle ages isn't the way to keep the plague at bay either.
________________________________________________________________________
So what do you suggest; quietly petitioning congress?
When those who seek political office even before they are elected cannot or will not support policy that the American people need; when after being elected they insulate themselves from those they were intended to serve and instead serve their corporate benefactors; when after they have failed and betrayed the people, they know there will be no cost for their betrayal because they will simply be voted into office again because of the broken two party system; when in the entire history of these United States the only two times when any legislation was ever passed that truly benefited the common people was when there was so much social upheaval and so many people in the streets that it threatened the stability of government and business as usual; your solution is non binding condemnation of their actions by the few liberal cities you could find to even do such a thing?
I have to respectfully disagree.
My view, concentration of wealth in too few hands means concentration of power to control government, and it does not matter what form of government, it does not matter what the common people think, do or say.
If you think there is going to be a peaceful resolution to what is happening all around us; if you think it can all be done without some form of violent confrontation then I would suggest you study history and the human condition just a bit more.
g
That the Twin Cities even chose to make such a show of force to regulate First Amendment activities is itself an affront and "out of control." You seem to think it is normal for a militarized police force to be present when citizens gather to exercise their fundamental political liberties. That position--that *starting* position--is already so out of whack and authoritarian that it heavily distorts the lens through which you view what is happening.
I don't think what Vermont city halls have done will make a difference anywhere in the pipeline. What got the political establishment's attention in the sixties was their literal loss of control over the public. Large segments of the public stopped respecting authority of all forms, among them law enforcement.
This is not to say we go out and purposefully confront police forces or cause destruction. Not in the least, as those acts do not help. But it is to say that we do *not* accept as a starting premise that a militarized police force is in any way entitled to regulate fundamental First Amendment activities. Nor do we ever take the side of law enforcement over persons trying to exercise their fundamental First Amendment activities, whether "professional" activists or not. To the extent there was any property destruction or vandalism by protesters, it has been (1) largely a product of the provocative police presence in the first place; (2) exceedingly minimal, given the number of people; and (3) exceedingly minor, as far as "crime" goes. And, you should know, "disorderly conduct," and "rioting" aren't real crimes. They are what the police charge people with when they arrest people en masse for no reason at all (other than their trying to exercise their political rights).
If you are interested in seeing video of police brutality in Seattle 1999 and elsewhere watch Cascadia Media Collective's "A Year in the Streets". It's hard to find but worth watching.
Don't forget that undercover cops have been caught on THIS VIDEO being the ones who are trying to incite the violence. I highly suspect this was the same situation at RNC. After all, the police chief said to news crews late yesterday that the pre-emptive raids were to to stop the criminals before they could do damage to property and people. No better way to validate your preemption law enforcement than to produce violence -by your own men, or hired contractors- later.
Watch this video of cops being caught by a peaceful crowd. Watch for the jack boots-- in this case, the tell tale sign...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7S1nHvvkzvA&feature=related
John F. Butterfield
Provincial police later admitted that the masked "demonstraters" were actually policeman.
The BBC, which unfailingly sports lurid headlines every time monk in Tibet breaks a fingernail, has chosen to completely censor any news about the fascistic police crackdown on the media and peaceful activists at the RNC - handmaidens to the police state. Not a word about the raids on the home where the citizen videographers, who document police-civilian encounters, were staying arresting the citizen witnesses and confiscating their equipment before they had even had a chance to take any videos in the streets.
It is as if our 'security state' can decide to turn any little corner of our country into a Gaza Strip whenever it chooses. We are now Palestinians in our own country! Just wait and see what will happen when the US attacks Iran...then there will be pre-emptive raids and crackdowns here that will make our heads spin. Afterall what good is a police state if you can't use all the means of repression? The BBC carried a big story about a Russian crackdown on 50 demonstrators in Ingushetia - with no arrests - but wrote nothing about the situation at the RNC - except to mention the presence of 'self-described anarchists' and even attribute that phrase to the Associated Press.
There is an answer to this. The people need to say no.
If this started against a small group, but if then say 20,000 people came out the next day to protest against the police raids, that would start to get the message across. Especially if there was 40,000 upset citizens the next day, and 80,000 the next.
Or, if these incumbent politicians all lost in the next election after a campaign that made it clear this sort of totalitarian government was the reason, that would stop it too.
If everyone just stays home and watches TV, then this continues.
Is anyone protesting in Denver about this? Is anyone planning on trying to retire Mayor Higgenlooper for the attacks on protesters here last week?
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
The main stream media has been saying 5,000 to 10,000 demonstrators marched. That is surely a lie. The house raids didn't discourage as many people like the proto-fascists hoped they would . The deliberate confusion connected to the RNC canceling it's Monday "festivities" may have kept a few people away, but THERE WERE MORE THAN 5,000-10,000 PEOPLE THERE! Who has a source for reality based numbers?
In general, always multiply corporate media turnout numbers for a protest by two.
Example. I was in Columbus Ga a few years back helping Indymedia cover the School of the Americas protests. The police chief was standing at the edge of the crowd, and a lady I was with asked the police chief how big he thought the crowd was. He said 15,000. Which agreed with what people who'd been to previous SOA protests were saying.
The next day, we picked up the local paper and they were saying the crowd was "7500". It was the 500 part that struck me. If you were just looking at a crowd that size and if you were asked how big it was, to me you'd be more likely to say "seven to eight thousand". It was the specificity of the "7500" combined with it being exactly half of what the police chief had said the day before that struck me.
And if I remember right, some other media outlets divided by 2 again, and reported the crowd at around 4000. I guess I should be thankful that they didn't say "3750".
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
What's all this about? I'm a Brit and didn't realise the US was a kinda-China. What's happened to free speech?
Is it that the Republicans consist of an old reactionary backed up by a Moose shooting fundamentalist evangelical creationist; or is it something serious?
Oh come on......Free speech does not mean freedom for anarchist thugs to run loose and create mayhem here in the twin cities.
It doesn't? Are you sure about that? Did I miss the anarchist exception in the First Amendment? You want to point it out for me?
"Running loose" (at political conventions) and "creating mayhem" (at political conventions) are fundamental First Amendment activities. Property destruction is not, but we hardly know the facts on that. And the issue is not whether or not some people, if they did, engaged in a handful of activities that broke minor laws amounting to misdemeanors (like vandalism), it is the very overwhelming presence of police in riot gear who for some reason Americans have come to believe it is proper to "oversee," "guide," and "regulate" First Amendment activities. Their very presence, in such numbers and in the forms they present themselves, is boldly provocative and should be universally opposed by any citizen who understands even rudimentary concepts of liberty and free association. This is not even to begin to comment on the drastically disproportionate police *response* to the handful of misdemeanors that have occurred.
That even some CD readers except even the starting premise of the new Statist America--that militarized police in riot gear should be *anywhere* in the vicinity of a political convention--is a disturbing comment on where we're at as a country.
I saw the video's...they are breaking shit for the sake of breaking it...and anyone who does that is a fool
it does not advance the intellectual superiority of their cause
Therefore what?
Therefore abridge the right of the people to assemble peaceably?
Therefore manhandle journalists and subject people to bogus arrest?
That does not advance the intellectual superiority of your cause.
"Therefore abridge the right of the people to assemble peaceably?"
Wise up. Peacful assembly does not include violent and destructive acts, and these acts are not protected by the constitution.
My question stands.
Some of them did not look peaceful to me.
To reason by analogy:
Some people in the US commit crimes. Therefore, we will treat all of them as though they commit crimes.
Enforcing the law is fine; abridging rights is not.
"Therefore, we will treat all of them as though they commit crimes."
I deny *all* demonstrators were treated like criminals. Your analogy comes up short.
Refamiliarize yourself with what a policy is. When you are ready to get serious, then rejoin.
Welcome to the club of deniers.
BTW, *ALL* people involved were treated VIOLENTLY as "anarchists" -- per the police's own statements on the street ( and pre-determined training and tactics -- "we'll show you what we do with anarchists who come to our city" -- bash slam ouch ! ), including:
___ demonstrators,
___ non-demonstrators
___ ( observers w/o agenda )
___ innocents & bystanders ( caught in closing nets of police lines )
___ press & various media reporters, news services
___ videographers & photographers
Once the violence escalated and become self-sustaining, the police felt completely justified in their preparations, tactics, and approaches -- attack, beat them silly, don't take back talk from nobody …
The circle of increasing violence was catapulted into papers and web site videos, more than the jacka$$ sewer stream media's official channels -- which provided a very propagandized version of events. From this, the millions of others experienced the pain and fear of those on actually on the streets ( demonstrators, police & innocents ), or nearby families of victims, area residents, visitors, etc …
___ vicarious violence
From my point of view the police treated themselves like criminals, created that counter reaction in others ( beating and gassing those w/o any cause ), with the obvious additional incendiary acceleration of police and federally funded spies, and agent provocateurs -- ultimately the analogy is longer than it is short.
Namaste
"*ALL* people involved were treated VIOLENTLY "
What BS. No other comment needed.
More violence,
___ so you see you've proven my Point !
Namaste
I don't think you get it. Minor misdemeanors happen every day. Does this mean we should have militarized police in riot gear patrolling our streets every day and making mass arrests in response? Please note that that scenario is actually a much *stronger* case for a militarized police presence since the scenario lacks the circumstance of a political convention and people trying to express their fundamental political rights.
The commission of a handful of misdemeanors does not warrant mass arrest nor police brutality nor the repression of persons engaging in First Amendment activities. Not ever. You have a severely warped world view.
"Minor misdemeanors happen every day. Does this mean we should have militarized police in riot gear patrolling our streets every day and making mass arrests in response?"
No. Only when mass demonstrations occur with the expectation from historic examples that violent and destructive acts will also occur. Especially when organizing groups openly state their intentions ahead of time on their websites.
"The commission of a handful of misdemeanors does not warrant mass arrest nor police brutality nor the repression of persons engaging in First Amendment activities. Not ever. "
When a crowd refuses to disperse when ordered to do so the police can use force, that is a fact. It is a matter of the judgement of the police officials on the scene whether the presence of "a handful" of violent and destructive actors would lead to a more general melee.
You wrote: "Only when mass demonstrations occur with the expectation from historic examples that violent and destructive acts will also occur."
Violent and destructive acts have historically occurred in *response* to police provocation (of which police *presence* itself is one). Including now in St. Paul. Moreover, your position is strictly at odds with the First Amendment. The government has no prerogative to channel or oversee First Amendment activities.
You wrote: "When a crowd refuses to disperse when ordered to do so the police can use force, that is a fact."
So is it a "fact" that the U.S. invaded Iraq; does it make it right? Does it make it something you seek to validate by virtue of its status as "fact" alone? On what authority do you believe the police can ask an assembly of people petitioning the government for redress of grievances to disperse? Are you aware of any contrary authority? (I am.) The police, whether or not the government currently empowers them to use force to repress First Amendment activities, should not have that power. It is our responsibility as citizens to see to that. This is liberty 101.
You wrote: "It is a matter of the judgement of the police officials on the scene whether the presence of 'a handful' of violent and destructive actors would lead to a more general melee."
I never ceded my First Amendment rights to the judgment of government officials, certainly not their enforcement goons. To do so is to be civically irresponsible.
"Violent and destructive acts have historically occurred in *response* to police provocation"
Perhaps, but this is beside the point of whether violent and destructive acts occur strictly on the accord of the actors.
"(of which police *presence* itself is one)."
Utter nonsense. Police presence is the default condition in all co\ities and most towns and has been for most of the history of this nation.
"Moreover, your position is strictly at odds with the First Amendment. The government has no prerogative to channel or oversee First Amendment activities."
More nonsense. Unprovoked violent and destructive acts are not first ammendment activities. Whether such activities are provoked or not is a question of findings of law and fact by judges.
"On what authority do you believe the police can ask an assembly of people petitioning the government for redress of grievances to disperse?"
Statutory law and judicial precedent.
"I never ceded my First Amendment rights to the judgment of government officials, "
Unfortunately for you, society has not entrusted unto you the legal power to make any judgements about that.
You wrote: "Police presence is the default condition in all co\ities and most towns and has been for most of the history of this nation."
Utter nonsense. Policing is a relatively recent phenomenon. Its power and ubiquity of even more recent vintage. Militarized policing is even newer still. And "police presence" is not a "default condition." Normatively, it is an organized alien presence anathema to liberty.
You wrote: "Unprovoked violent and destructive acts are not first ammendment activities. Whether such activities are provoked or not is a question of findings of law and fact by judges."
First, the actions were provoked, and this is indisputable. The city and county provoked them by sending out a massive military police force and treating--by their mere presence--citizens trying to exercise their First Amendment rights as criminals. This makes people angry, justifiably so. Does it justify committing minor misdemeanors? Probably not. But since it is absolutely predictable, the responsibility for the criminal acts lies with the government, which can only be understood to have knowingly caused it. So direct your approbation where it belongs.
You wrote: "Statutory law and judicial precedent [is the authority on which you believe the police can ask an assembly of people petitioning the government for redress of grievances to disperse]."
Statutory law does not supersede the Constitution. And judicial precedent only goes so far, particularly since their servitude is by and large only as faithful as that of their political appointees. Funny how the government can both ask an assembly of people petitioning the government for redress of grievances to disperse and then subsequently approve it, no? Do you not find any room in your fealty to the government for the citizen to breathe?
You wrote: "Unfortunately for you, society has not entrusted unto you the ... power to make any judgements about [what rights you have]."
Isn't this the crux of the issue? You trust the the violent arm of the State to tell me what rights I ought to have. I trust my fellow citizens to fight for what rights I ought to have. I prefer my vision for society to yours. You encapsulate the very point I have been making: we have become so dysfunctional that many of us have turned over the prerogative to determining what rights we have to the government. I reiterate: I--and thousands others--have not conceded my rights to political activity and free speech, and it does not matter what the State says. With your attitude, neither women nor blacks would have ever won the right to vote, because "unfortunately," society had not "entrusted unto" them the "power to make judgments" about what rights they have. What an authoritarian load of crap.
Unended, I agree with you entirely. What has been beamed around the world is that these police thugs used coordinated terror and violence against anyone and everyone. I just saw it portrayed that way on Japanese TV. Totally out of control and disproportionate to any conceivable, let alone apparent, threat to order, we saw police hemming in and attacking peaceful demonstrators and reporters without giving them any quarter. In short, state orchestrated terrorism.
Jakenewton, your argument for fascist authority will, I’m sure, put you in good standing for your application to the Stazi, but I thought in America you actually pretended to respect “liberty” a little more than your justification for gratuitous violence as exhibited by these thugs. All the world has seen is over baring armed militarized thugs needlessly beating, traumatizing and arresting people without apparent purpose.
Perhaps you should take a hint from the Bangkok police chief! But there again we know that this is nothing to do with local policing but rather a Federal policy worked out by the new Stazi, which local police are only too happy to comply with.
Violence breads violence, and when a country exports all its manufacturing jobs and even services industries the only home town industry left is “security”, you have to start the heads rolling somewhere, Right? God you fascist pigs are simple to read, but pretty pathetic. Definitely you will reap what you sew, in spades…
" your justification for gratuitous violence as exhibited by these thugs. "
I haven't yet seen anything unjustified. *You*, OTOH, seem to want to let those who do behave badly off the hook, or deny that it occured. Why are there not as much trouble today or yesterday? Why was Denver relatively quiet? Wise up.
"Policing is a relatively recent phenomenon."
False. Don't just make up stuff. Police forces are ancient:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police#History
"Militarized policing is even newer still."
False again.
"And "police presence" is not a "default condition." "
You are correct. The presence of police are first established by state and municipal statute. Such law is ubiquitous in the US.
"First, the actions were provoked,"
*All* of them were? This is an opinion of yours, not a fact.
"and this is indisputable."
No it is not.
"The city and county provoked them by sending out a massive military police force"
This thesis is ridiculous. It is only in you opinion that the above is somehow provocative, and no where can you show that this presence of police *compelled* anyone to act in any particular way. Those committing violent and destructive actions have free will to do so or not to do so, no matter if police are present.
"Statutory law does not supersede the Constitution."
The Constitution *is* statutory law. The Constitution allows for states and municipalities to write their own statutory laws, with only some restrictions.
"You trust the the violent arm of the State to tell me what rights I ought to have."
I don't generally put my trust in any part of the State about anything.
"I trust my fellow citizens to fight for what rights I ought to have."
Sounds violent the way you use the word "fight". There could be legal consequences for actions you take in "fighting" for your rights.
"neither women nor blacks would have ever won the right to vote,"
In this example women and blacks won voting rights by first winning the political backing for those rights to be affirmed. On the way, there may have been acts of violence or destruction by them that may have somehow helped them gain that power, but that is besides the point. Whether action in St. Paul today would eventually lead to political backing for some issue remains to be seen, and is separate from whether the action is legal or not in itself.
You wrote: "False. Don't just make up stuff. Police forces are ancient:"
Ha. No, police forces and policing of communities, in the form they take today, are of very recent vintage, historically speaking.
http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/willmodpol.html
You wrote: "This thesis [that police presence provokes the commission of minor misdemeanors] is ridiculous. It is only in you opinion that the above is somehow provocative, and no where can you show that this presence of police *compelled* anyone to act in any particular way. Those committing violent and destructive actions have free will to do so or not to do so, no matter if police are present."
Who said anything about compulsion? Compulsion is not provocation. Provocation is provocation. And the State's threatening of its citizens with a massive military force is undeniably provocative to anybody who has not lost all his sense to Statism, as I concede many Americans--including you--have. If I come to your house to have a political discussion with you, and you answer the door weapon in hand, in what world are you not being provocative?
You wrote: "The Constitution *is* statutory law. The Constitution allows for states and municipalities to write their own statutory laws, with only some restrictions."
No, statutory law is laws passed by Congress and compiled in the United States Code. Constitutional law is the constitution (and its judicial interpretation). The Constitution does allow for states and municipalities to govern, but it does affirmatively prevents them from regulating the speech, assembling, and petitioning of and by American citizens. Sending an armed military force to watch Americans engage in this behavior is a provocative form of regulation by the government that is indefensible.
"Provocation is provocation."
Here's some provocation:
http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon2/domguemap.html
Celebrating violent acts. I wonder where the people in St. Louis get their ideas.
"in the form they take today,"
As if they were of some homogenous type universally in place, with no historic precedent. Ha.
"If I come to your house to have a political discussion with you, and you answer the door weapon in hand, in what world are you not being provocative?"
And if this was my response because the last time you came to my house you broke my windows and my bones, it is *you* who has provoked me by showing up again. The simple presence of police neither compels nor provokes violent and destructive acts, and everyone in St. Paul knew darned well ahead of time they would be there, just like in Denver. And in both cases. there were plenty_of_people_who refrained from violence and destruction.
Stop letting people off the hook for bad behavioral decisions they make.
"statutory law is laws passed by Congress and compiled in the United States Code. "
Statutory law is law *written* by a legislative body, such as the US Constitution.
So you acknowledge that executive "signing agreements" are not lawful ?
Namaste
"Violent and destructive acts have historically occurred in *response* to police provocation"
Perhaps, but this is beside the point of whether violent and destructive acts occur strictly on the accord of the actors.
"(of which police *presence* itself is one)."
Utter nonsense. Police presence is the default condition in all co\ities and most towns and has been for most of the history of this nation.
"Moreover, your position is strictly at odds with the First Amendment. The government has no prerogative to channel or oversee First Amendment activities."
More nonsense. Unprovoked violent and destructive acts are not first ammendment activities. Whether such activities are provoked or not is a question of findings of law and fact by judges.
"On what authority do you believe the police can ask an assembly of people petitioning the government for redress of grievances to disperse?"
Statutory law and judicial precedent.
"I never ceded my First Amendment rights to the judgment of government officials, "
Unfortunately for you, society has not entrusted unto you the legal power to make any judgements about that.
Does the phrase Inalienable rights ring a ( liberty ) bell for you ?
How about making no law that infringes upon …
Namaste
Free enterprise means FREE FOR ALL. GO PEOPLE GO.
Free enterprise means FREE FOR ALL. GO PEOPLE GO.
Free enterprise means FREE FOR ALL. GO PEOPLE GO.
Yes, we may have "free press", but the news is very biased. I went to a huge protest against the war (before it started). There were so many people. Avenues of New York City were filled to the brim and I remember reading a very brief news article that said that there were maybe a quarter of the number of protesters than were actually there.
I also witnessed police brutality on people who were being very peaceful.
If you are really interested, you should check out the video "ACLU Freedom Files." There is a great section on free speech/protesting that demonstrates how the republican party responds to protest.
It's hideous!
The Democrats don't respond any better.
Remember, the WTO at Seattle was with a local Democratic mayor and a Democratic President. And here in Denver last week the police repression we saw was from another Democratic mayor. And the IVAW march clearly showed that the Obama campaign was being consulted on police responses. Remember that when you see the video anarchist kids being surrounded, peppersprayed or detained, or the video of the lady from Code Pink being beaten by the cop in riot gear, or hear about the raid on the convergence center here or the closing of the 'festival of democracy' by police order.
The problem is, if you just think this is a Republican thing, then it leads to the mistake of thinking electing Democrats can change it. Quick, point to me the public statements that Obama has made denouncing this repression. Where are they?
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
I know. Sorry, I was being horribly sarcastic. I hated the idea of the Iraq war too. Having a number of Arab friends and having lived in the Gulf for nine years I was disgusted by the opportunistic war. I visited my Omani friends last year, after 23 years away, and had to apologise for the war before I could embrace them and collapse in a heap of sentimental reminiscence - sorry. It was embarassing. They are clever people and know the ways of the world, and understood. Very decent and good people - believe me. Nobody liked Saddam, truly, but he was THEIR ( the Arabs, not the Omani's - understand this!) dictator (backed by us). That we destroyed him, and 'their' people and cultural heritage in the process will never be forgotten.
"As the day wore on, the carnival atmosphere turned ugly."
Too bad, parades and carnivals are the most effective form of protest.
Well, here in Denver the police attacked the "Festival of Democracy". By the time Obama was speaking at the football stadium, that park was completely closed, surrounded by fences and guarded by riot police.
I guess the bad guys know that 'festival's are the most effective form of protest too.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
A recent Animal Planet program told of a salamander whose young metamorphosed into algae eaters or cannibals who killed and ate their brethren, depending on the availability of water and algae.
The more water and algae available, the more algae eaters evolved. The less water and algae available, the more killers evolved.
Overpopulation plus resource depletion and hoarding is also turning humans into killers of their own kind.
Repression and imprisonment is one way to get rid of the competition.
If you want to be a salamander in spirit or behaviour that is just fine by me, but personally I prefer my present incarnation with all its complications shortcomings. I always wonder why those who suggest the problem is overpopulation never think of themselves as the last grain of sand that tipped the bucket.
In fact the population question is a red herring. It is not how many we are but how disciplined we are relative to ourselves and our environment. Can we tell the difference between material “needs” and material “wants”? For example, why do we waste 95% of the protein stuffing soya into cows because we like beef better than tofu? How much protein does it take to use your brain?
90% of the problems are solved if you start from the point of how can you make it better for the other guy? I mean if the police were really interested in protecting the peace why are they not out there protecting the demonstrators on their legitimate peaceful marches against an illegal war? But then there would be no need for “expensive” riot gear.
After watching this morning Free Speech TV and the arrest of Amy Goodman, one of my coworkers, whose son is a cop in Minneapolis, is proudly showing his photo dressed in anti riot gear!
Like if he was a hero for supressing free speech.
The saddest part is that when I pointed out to her how unacceptable this was and that they have been also arresting journalists, etc; she didn't take a clue and just changed the subject. She was not even offended by my comments, and kept showing the photo to others, who celebrated the "hero" too. (Geez, I gotta change jobs soon)
If I heard the show correctly before work this morning, the lady who was shooting the footage (see democracynow.org) of her own arrest is one of the 130 people who were charged with a 'felony'. I wasn't there, but from what I saw in Denver, that's probably pretty typical of the sorts of bogus charges the other 129 are facing.
Go watch that video if you haven't seen it.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
I've been at jobs just like that before. It's so frustrating. Hang in there!
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"
Jobs like that? The whole country is like that. Clueless as a brick!
If you scratch the surface you will find that there is a multi billion dollar industry in crowd control equipment. Israeli and US among others have come up with some brilliant new and expensive gadgets that every city should have.... But, there must be a reasonable escalation of the level of violence out there to justify it, right?
Right!
So, a greater deal of effort should go into identifying "provocateurs" and following the logic of police expenditure for security in cities. But don't hold your breath if you expect such investigative reporting from the MSM. Follow the money.
Yep, they spent $50 million here in Denver. Probably the same again in Naziapolis.
Jello Biafra had a great line at the Nader rally. He said he saw them parking city dump trucks to block roads, and cops riding on the running boards of city maintenence trucks. He followed that by "OK, that's $1 million. Where'd the other $49 million go."
Those 'crowd control' device companies, who are politically well connected due to the bribes they spread around (oh, I'm sorry, 'campaign contributions'), is probably a big chunk of the answer. Plus probably some 'consultants' and 'trainers' who also bribe their way into work.
So far, you and Jello are the only people I've heard talking about where all this money is going.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
And the US has the unmitigated gall to criticize China . . .
I know, this is what I tried to point out in the comments on every single Olympic protest story, but people thought I was defending the actions of the Chinese government. I was just calling us out for being self-righteous and hypocritical Westerns.
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"
Police are being trained in military fashion. Local police are increasing their budgets for "riot" gear. The powers that be know that pretty soon the real crackdown will occur. We are being prepped for a showdown folks. The writing on the wall is clear as day! Don't you see? Things are going to get much much worse. We will probably be faced with martial law and then the revolutionary waves will start cresting. People will want to be out in the streets. That is what the cops are being trained for. They know it's coming. We will be a third world country soon.
What result did you expect from going global, free market, one world government, etc.??? Capitalist free markets are the real antichrist. We need socialist fair markets and global awareness to the point that we have an egalitarian, agrarian mentality along with a sustainable high tech industrial development mind set. Watch "The 11th Hour." I was motivated and actually inspired!
Can we turn our world around now before it's too late? Some other poster on this site, I forget who, had the right idea. Turn into ourselves. Form local groups. Eliminate our dependence on our Federal government. Live our lives as a new thing in a new way.....come back to the earth and be part of the web of life. Forgo consumerism. Grow stuff, make stuff, share stuff. We need to start. I am on my way....come on along!!!
An excellent book on the subject of lessening consumerism and building a community is Bill McKibben's "Deep Economy". While the statistics are depressing, there are numerous examples that give hope.
Today's Daily News (San Fernando Valley, CA) had a remarkable interview with Bob Hertzberg, who ran for mayor and was beaten by Antonio Villaraigosa. He speaks to why the true advances in using environmentally-friendly technologies for sustainable communities are being made in other parts of the world, especially third world countries. His firm has developed new solar technology in Wales (not exactly known for its sunny weather). Why? Less control by municipal and investor-owned utilities.
If US citizens don't stop feeding the capitalist/consumerist machine and start working locally, it soon won't matter whether we have a Republican or Democrat as president. Grow stuff, make stuff, share stuff...yes, we can. But we also need to level the playing field for entrepreneurs who are fighting the mega-buck powers-that-be.
There seems to be a growing number of cities, large and small, that are working their way out of the investor-owned utilities rackets. You are on the right track with local grow, make, share. Leveling the playing field for entrepreneurs will require training the people to demand something different from markets than we're used to demanding: High quality production that is also local. This won't be easy at first, but it gets easier later. How do we build infrastructure that streamlines local production? This takes information, instruction, guidelines and standards (e.g. like building codes). Much of the infrastructure is already there for localism. It just needs some adjustment and expansion. How do we prevent its corruption by the elite? We have to enforce strict limits on asset ownership and enterprise size to something very small, and defend the core policy from corruption - yes this means limits on both economic and political freedom for the elite. The strategy involves two prongs: Training the people as mentioned above, and implementing in law. The glue that holds it all together is the people's training to demand localism.
"Police are being trained in military fashion. Local police are increasing their budgets for "riot" gear"
The Federal Governement gave the St. Paul police department $50,000,000 for "security" for the RNC. They had to do something with it. The same thing happened for the last one in NYC. They had helicopters out the yin-yang. For a while after there were at least 3 helicopters following every Critical Mass bike ride.
Agents provocateur are certainly not unknown in our relentless attempts to quash protest. Back during Viet Nam, a non-violent group in Seattle was joined by a guy who soon began telling everyone that what they were doing was ineffective. They needed to bomb a bank or something to bring attention to their cause. The group wasn't interested. The guy said he could get the explosives and show them how to rig them. Still not interested.
Finally, he showed up with some explosives, taught a few people how to plant them. They were still reluctant. I don't remember now (Many years have passed) if he set a bomb, or just helped with setting it up. In came the cops and they were arrested as a bunch of terrorists.
At trial, the chief witness was the FBI agent who had set the entire thing up as an agent provocateur. I think it was thrown out of court, but as I say, it was a long time ago.
At the WTO protests in Seattle, there was a small band of masked "anarchists" who broke windows and started a crackdown on the peaceful protesters. My take at the time, including the fact that the police, who were covering everyone like a blanket were always somewhere else when the "anarchists" were doing their thing made me think that they were probably police or CIA/FBI plants to disrupt and de-legitimize the peaceful protesters.
"At the WTO protests in Seattle, there was a small band of masked "anarchists" who broke windows and started a crackdown on the peaceful protesters. My take at the time, including the fact that the police, who were covering everyone like a blanket were always somewhere else when the "anarchists" were doing their thing made me think that they were probably police or CIA/FBI plants to disrupt and de-legitimize the peaceful protesters."
As I understand it, this was proven to be true in subsequent court proceedings.
This "anarchist" MO is exactly what happened to location where Amy Goodman's staff was located at. So-called "anarchists" smashed in the windows there. So how long before we find out that these bands that broke off from the main marches were agent provocateurs or people who were led by agent provocateurs?
Can you get the headlines (?)(;~<) for this stuff. I remember it well and surely there's an archival something somewhere. A headline is worth a thousand lies. Not time to teach the children well, just maybe to flash it in front of them.
The government's idea of full transparency of action includes
trumped-up crimminal violations, intimidation, and outright lies
in order to supress justifiable dissent of the war in Iraq, human
man rights-both in America and abroad, and our 35 plus years of cre-
ating a propoganda-based, money controlled totaliterian police state.
Why all the subterfuge if one is morally, intellectually, spirit-
ually, and physically superior to the crude masses? Why create
crimminals amoung your own people based on lies when any logical
person is aware no such crimminality exsist?
The answer is fear, greed, and control. Fear because these cowards
know that if they aren't armed to the teeth, injuries and death can
befall these mere mortals just like the rest of us.
Greed, because in their twisted view of survival includes laws cre-
ated to enslave those who know when they being bamboozled by coporate
robber barons. Politicians, who change their position more than a
hooker on a good night. Unless a hooker is drug-addled, at least
she or he offers you a condom. Politicians feign ingnorance to so-
cial or ecomonmic std's wrought from their putrid legislation against
decent working people.
Control, because just like typical crimminals, if one can't be con-
vinced with smooth talk, than these caitiffs employ blood-sucking in-
timidation and violence and yes, death to all who dare oppose them.
Granted, somtimes their methods are subtle and escalatory. Stand up
for your individual right not to be fucked with by any egomanical bul-
ly with delusions of godhood and you're considered the twisted odd-
ball who never grew up. If you demand to be left alone too often,
then you become employable only for the lowest paying jobs. I believe
that is one reason why NAFTA was created-to destroy unions bargining
power and supress individual rights of all workers to earn a livable
wage.
So, in lieu of violence unless I'm attacked first, I have a suggestion
for decent people feeling put upon in these difficult times. If you en-
counter anyone who believes in might makes right and is in any type of
pain, walk on by and let them die. Anyone who calls the action in Den-
righteous and justified, walk on by if you see them third, hungry,
and weak. even if you can help them, Anyone who believes in free fuck,
opps, my mistake, free trade, walk on by and let them die. Because of
their warmongering lies, Even Jesus might understand if just walk on
by and let them die.
"One police officer was punched in the back and another suffered from heat exhaustion."
YOU POOR BABIES, awwwwww.
"Their efforts were nothing short of heroic," Coleman said. "They did not fail. They did not take the bait."
WHAT VALOR! WHAT VENALITY!
Ridiculous hey? Goodman's crew get's violently mistreated, protesters not involved with acts that could very well be creations of the police themselves are shot at point blank range with rubber bullets, pepper spray, and the like, and one poor police officer gets punched in the back (perhaps accidentally? not sure whey anyone looking for a fight would go for the back) and another poor peace officer suffers from heat exhaustion from wearing that "sweltering" riot gear.
Good grief! Restrained response my ass! Did Common Dreams put this up here so we can collectively mock it. What a shit ass story.
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"
If done by APs, it will have been done ala Watergate, without letting the local cops in on the game. Because of the Seattle precedent, any failure by Denver PD NOT to brief its officers regarding the AP issue, ie "don't pass anyone who flashes a federal badge out of the dragnet", and rigorously enforce IDing everyone who is arrested, would be a failure to meet professional standards. So if they didn't, they should be crab meat. Wasn't that how it came out in court in Seattle? Through at least some local cop type work? O ye of little faith! But somehow we need to get the Seattle headlines of it's incident out in front of the public ASAP, or they won't want to believe it so much that they won't be able to.
Welcome to "THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY" Brought to you by our "TWO" party democracy.
DeMOCKERY, more like. Welcome to the End of America, folks. This is what fascism looks like.
Mayor Coleman is a liberal Democrat and his remarks condone the excessive policing, the use of military units, and the police violence at the Republican Party Convention. In fact, the entire Democratic Party is to blame for having hid itself behind the excessive use of police in Denver at their convention, as well as at the RP event.
It is time that the American people tell the Democrats that they are fed up with their support for militarism, torture, and use of excessive police everywhere in the US. The Democrats need to know that we don't want their prison society, and that we hold them every bit as responsible as the Republican Party for what they are doing to our country..
It's always the fault of the democrats, first and foremost. Never the fascist party who WROTE the "laws" of repression. Give me a break!
I don't mind laying some blame on a party that's capitulated to the fear and fascism; but you people who always blame the democrats FIRST, and never think to hold the party in power responsible for pushing us all down this road, are either right-wing dissemblers from the other party, or leftist---blinded by pure hatred of anything Democratic. I'm not sure which is worse.
I say there, hold your horses. The mayor might as well have said "if there were any agent provacateurs, we got them and they'll all be identified."
Making these arguments here is ineffective anyway. What is needed ASAP is a repro of the Seattle headlines describing what happened in the Emrald City.
There are people, lots of people, out there who do not want to believe this could happen that they cannot, and will not until too late, unless we can show them a picture. I can just see Colbert with it in his hand for his usual harrangue.
The evidence which established AP's in Seattle was in large part derived from local cop work. If they were set up, and not kissed, they will be very interested in finding it out. And there's lots of cops who aren't idiots, just too many who are. So quit whining and find the headlines and who to get them to.
Thank you Bob Pomeroy!
We can't afford to spend our time (1)bemoaning what has happened or (2)getting caught up in arguments about whether or not agent provocateurs played a role -- of course they probably did! or (3)demonizing one political party or the other.-- I suspect both. We need to do some serious thinking and remembering. We need to get to work! We need to show the evidence (published) to prove this sort of thing has happened before and also show the evidence (published) of what was proven at that time.
Buried deep in my archives I believe I have material from WTO-Seattle, WTO-Canada(?) and WTO-Genoa. Treatment of demonstrators at each became progressively worse. Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure I did not save any published local headlines or local reports. These were all written reports from people on the ground. Fortunately the Geonoa protest did result in a successful lawsuit brought by the parent of a British demonstrator who had some clout.
I remember that the police in Genoa were not police. They were Italian Special Forces. They executed a protester in full view of the cameras with the well-known 'double-tap' of two pistol shots to the head, and passed it off as a nevous rookie on riot control duty.
Right.
Would you have a rookie on riot duty at one of the most important meetings of major heads of state?
For a wonderful and entertaining look at where we are, watch Michael Palin's 'Brazil'.
Do we have a bet or not? BTW Brazil, great movie.
I think because there is no need to blame the repubs -- it is implied every time their name is even mentioned. We all know where they stand are are in virtual agreement on the fact. The point of contention between us is the Dems, so they are mentioned more.
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"
The MSP StarTribune has a picture of idiots trashing a department store in my favorite city of St. Paul. St. Paul is one of the most liberal cities in the country so why are left wing anarchists trashing it? Many leftists ar