october 5th mass demos

Originally posted by snafu7700
umm, i think i said peacefully protesting. you know as well as i do that every arrest you site, especially sheehan, involves very unpeaceful like behaviour.

I know very well what you said, and I fully anticipated your response. I'd really like you to go through EACH ONE of the links I posted and show me where the protests were violent.

I don't believe you can do it.

not right now i cant...small matter of a 3 week old baby to take care of. but having just seen names like cindy sheehan and NCNR (non-violent, notpeaceful), it pretty much tells me all i need to know.

[edit on 2-10-2006 by snafu7700]

I will look for one in my area.

If there is, i'll be there. With bells on.

Originally posted by snafu7700
umm, i think i said peacefully protesting. you know as well as i do that every arrest you site, especially sheehan, involves very unpeaceful like behaviour.

The ones about the RNC you are wrong, they were herding people into alleys and arresting them. there was something like 2500 arrests in 1 or so weeks.. tell me all those people were being bad? I think not.

A judge deemed most of those arrests unconstitutional and warned the city of NY to let them go or it will be 1000 dollars per head per day... Sounds like a legal arrest to me don't you think?

Sending them to pier 57 on the hudson..

They arrested some well known people.

A former VP to Morgan Stanley, a Newsweek reporter, a 16 yr old kid, people who were just walking got arrested, get facts straight before you spew garbage, cause its easily broken down.

glad to see so many are making an effort to go, but as was mentioned earlier, take cameras and videos and film as much as possible. you can bet that there wont be much tv airtime given to it so its up to the people to provide coverage and report how the demo's go.

depending on how some newly rushed in laws are excersised, it may be one of the last times you can peacefully protest.

its no good saying if you dont like things then vote because another whistleblower has now come forward saying the diebold machines were rigged to win the election for the republicans with a patch applied to the machines in mainly democratic areas. you should be on the streets if not for any other reason than demanding a whole new election with no machines involved and to arrest those involved if you value freedom or democracy in any way shape or form! if not, then you support liars and thieves. to paraphrase, you're either with the american people or with the criminal coup.

Ok, now here's a weird thought that just crossed my mind. I was just reading another thread about how there is a lot of activity involving "Put Options" in the stock market for October 6.

[url=http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread228140/pg1]http://www.abovetopsecret.com/url]

People are concerned about this because there was a lot of the same type of activity before 9/11. Now there's a huge call for protests on October 5. Could these protests be a diversion for an attack? Keep the police busy so that they can put everything in place? Just a thought....

Sorry for the bad linking job. I'm new at this.

[edit on 10/2/2006 by closettrekkie]

[edit on 10/2/2006 by closettrekkie]

Originally posted by closettrekkie
Ok, now here's a weird thought that just crossed my mind. I was just reading another thread about how there is a lot of activity involving "Put Options" in the stock market for October 6.

[url=http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread228140/pg1]http://www.abovetopsecret.com/url]

People are concerned about this because there was a lot of the same type of activity before 9/11. Now there's a huge call for protests on October 5. Could these protests be a diversion for an attack? Keep the police busy so that they can put everything in place? Just a thought....

Sorry for the bad linking job. I'm new at this.

[edit on 10/2/2006 by closettrekkie]

[edit on 10/2/2006 by closettrekkie]

Call me cynical, but I have a funny feeling that these protests will ammount to nothing, will be fairly small/sparse in nature and will receive little media attention.

To the one who asked what we can do since protesting doesnt work:
Thats the tricky one, it depends on how much will you have to make things change and how far you are willing to go. Some say civil war is all thats left if people fail to remove these people not only from power but also erase them from existance so they wont do it again (that includes the corporations and elites who support them, also the small person who is a major supporter). Now if that doesnt fit your fancy: leave the nation and hide untill they come knocking. No? Refuse to follow them, get your whole town or city to turn on them and outright oppose them in all forms: make your own radio station and TV station, pirate radios and remove yourselves from the equation and should they try and stop you: fight back in any form necessary to protect yourselves (do not become like them in process). Or you can just keep on going and have an endless cycle of death and destruction by thinking youve won when youve lost. If you do not understand: Thinking you took them out of office and things are going to get better, thats a mistake. You will have won NOTHING untill the coporations and elites who push these policies are GONE for GOOD.

I've been weighing this all day, and by all means, I do not want anyone to feel afraid to act upon their legal right to demonstration. I've been bothered though, and I felt like I should put it to you all.

This is getting big word of mouth publicity. The new bill (aka torture bill) has been put through, and Bush is sure to sign it ASAP (I doubt he weighs consequences at this point). Is this the first test of the bill? Is this when the first "enemy civilian combatants" are going be picked up?

I don't know, this just seems fishy to me.

What is wrong with being labeled an enemy of something that you don’t believe in? I actually own a t-shirt that says on the front, “Either you are with us, or you are with the enemy. George W Bush”

Nothing at all wellwhatnow except for the fact that new bill can get my butt locked up indefinitely with no trial by peers, and tortured to whatever lengths bush co. decides. and he said you are with the terrorists, not the enemy. As fragantly as that word has been thrown around, it is easily applied to just about anyone now thanx to its diluting.

snafu, rich23 answered your call and showed you multiple instances of PEACEFUL PROTESTERS being arrested. Come on back after your done taking care of your little one and lets talk about it then. And i do vote (and have for 20yrs now) in local, regional and national elections so dont lecture me about voting. If you trust the diebold machines so much that u think elections are perfectly tallied, ive got some ocean front property for ya.

closettrekkie, put options get put down on stocks all the time, its the types of stocks that they get put on that can cause questions. Just what companies did they get put on for Oct.6th? Kinda weirdin me out here, nothing of value to the new bill i hope

Several people have asked what bill??? I do believe it's this one Bill HR 6166. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.

Originally posted by snafu7700
not right now i cant...small matter of a 3 week old baby to take care of. but having just seen names like cindy sheehan and NCNR (non-violent, notpeaceful), it pretty much tells me all i need to know.

Take all the time you want...

but come and back up this disgraceful slur with some hard facts, please.

Otherwise, it's just right-wing wind.

I'm still waiting...

and I shall be fascinated to see how you distinguish between "non-violent" and "peaceful". Does that mean protesters are not allowed to make any noise? We wouldn't want Rummy's slumbers disturbed, is that it?

I'm still trying to get my head around that distinction. At what point does non-violent cross over into non-peaceful? Please lay it out for me, with graphic examples, and tell me why such people should be arrested.

Peaceful means with out violence or agression.
Non-violent just means with out violence

So actually peaceful and non-violent are two completely different words and can't be inter changed.

Many groups may not use violent tactics but they sure use agressive ones. You can break the law fairly easily with out using violence. I think many of these non-violent protestors got arrested for things like hand cuffing themselves to private or federal property, breaking occupancy laws or predetermined protest routes, using visual or verbal obscentities. There's just no telling what will happen when you get 5,000 people all crowded together with news, police, media and an obvious chip on their shoulder.

The reason why many of the protests never get much coverage here in NYC is because, well, it's New York freakin City. There can be a rally of epic proportions and you wouldn't know it. Take the RNC protests for instance, it's was much larger than reported and if you went five blocks away from the protest in any direction you would never have known it was going on. There were a lot of people arrested and the normal holding cells at Central Bookings downtown are already overloaded from normal business hence why they put them at Chelsea. From what I remember everyone was released as promptly as you can expect from being arrested. I've known people who were arrested on friday and didn't get out of holding until teusday because it was a long weekend.

Although there is deffinitly a point to the new bill that just passed. The plan all along was to eventually label us as terrorists. Do people not remember the Red Scare? I don't think a protest is going to stop the federal government unless 2/3 of the country are in on it.

So you would characterise

Originally posted by Shadowflux
...things like hand cuffing themselves to private or federal property, breaking occupancy laws or predetermined protest routes, using visual or verbal obscentities

as aggressive?

Is that really the best anyone can do? I'm still waiting for snafu to reply, actually.

Visual or verbal obscenities should come under First Amendment protection if anyone really cares about free speech. And I doubt very much that for example Cindy Sheehan is guilty of those things. And I'm sorry, I don't really think that the other examples you give are convincing instances of aggression. Chaining oneself to something is a method of protest that goes back to the Suffragettes and beyond. It may inconvenience some people but it doesn't endanger anyone except the protestor. As for breaking occupancy laws, they are routinely changed or selectively enforced by the police in attempts to limit protests. This is currently the case around Dubya's retreat in Crawford.

Oh... btw, what constitutes a verbal obscenity? Ever hear about the guy who got arrested for wearing a t-shirt with a peace sign on it?

You can find the story here.

When the Crossgates Mall tangled with freedom of speech, it got more than it bargained for.

The mall ordered Stephen Downs, 60, a local lawyer, to take off a T-shirt bearing the slogans “Peace on Earth,” and “Give Peace a Chance” or leave the mall, near Albany, N.Y., Mar. 3. When he refused, they called in the police and had him arrested for trespassing. Downs’ son Roger, 31, who was wearing a T-shirt reading “No War With Iraq,” and “Let Inspections Work,” agreed to remove his shirt. He was not arrested.

On March 5, 150 people wearing T-shirts with peace slogans marched through the mall in a protest organized by a local group, Women Against War.

The mall decided that night to drop the trespassing charge. A spokesperson told the World the management had “reevaluated the situation.”

On Mar. 9, 200 people wearing pro-peace slogans packed the mall’s food court, calling on the mall to halt its selective attack on anti-war messages.

“When I grab a bite to eat and I’m wearing a T-shirt that expresses my opinion, I want the same freedom for people who wear any T-shirt,” Erin O’Brien, of Women Against War, told the World. “We’re being targeted for one particular view. This is blatant discrimination.” O’Brien said she has frequently seen people at the mall wearing T-shirts bearing “misogynist, lewd, or violent language” without any interference from security guards.

Which might well come under the heading of "visual obscenity" - certainly more likely than a peace t-shirt.

[edit on 3-10-2006 by rich23]

I thought about going, but I have no way to get there. I will merely hand out awareness flyers instead. Try to do what I can.

Cops arrest protestors every day, and they usually don't deserve it.
I'm currently sitting on a mountian of video showing such things, and more, lots of which you may have seen before. Cops shooting a lady in the face and head with riot bullets for no reason and bragging about it...AFT agents bragging that they are "honed to kill".... Armies of ninja cops spraying tear gas through the protest barrier into a crowd (while the crowd is 5-10 feet behind the barrier)...a guy getting the baton beat-down just because he gave a cop the finger...and for every video I have, there's probaby two or three similar or worse incidents that we don't see or hear about.

Sometimes, an individual will do something that requires force, and at this time cops have my full support in taking care of business. But protests are pretty much asking to be gassed, beaten and/or arrested these days, which is wrong.

Thank your lucky stars that you are here in the US where we have a very powerful First Amendment that allows you to protest.

You wouldn't be able to pull it off in Iran or Venezuela. Remember those two idiots trash-talking the US at the UN last week? They don't allow any form of protest in their country.

The only hope we have of protests being noticed is to protest every day. Banners, flags, groups in corners, and non stop talk about how miserable we are...that's the only way to get attention.

A few groups here and there on specific days aint gonna cut it.

LOOK AT ME I'm mad as hell and i'm not going to take it anymore!!! EVERYDAY FROM TODAY ON.....LET OTHERS KNOW YOU'RE PISSED...ENOUGH!!!!!

So, did i get through to you all?

Seriously, its got to be done everyday!!!

Originally posted by jsobecky
Thank your lucky stars that you are here in the US where we have a very powerful First Amendment that allows you to protest.

You wouldn't be able to pull it off in Iran or Venezuela. Remember those two idiots trash-talking the US at the UN last week? They don't allow any form of protest in their country.

"Ammmericaaaa!, F*** Yeah!
Commin along to save the MotherF***in day yeeah!"

Yeah this isn't about Iran or Venezuela though.....................yet

[edit on 3-10-2006 by Xeros]