I think what we should do when we protest, is make sure we are filming [the police]. Of course we won't be able to do anything like the ones up there with all the sharp shooters you see on all the roof tops (the really big cameras with the big lenses for those really neat close up shots), but if we film them and enough do it, there is much more chance that some footage will make it over to the news media that day from right there at the front lines...that is if the news would ever even show it (assuming something like what in the video happens). From what I've experienced the news media strongly downplays any protests. They'll say something like "dozens of protesters lined the sidewalk nearby..." when in reality it's more along the lines of many hundred if not thousands. then the camera pans over to the fund raiser ($500 rubber chicken and thousand dollar photos with big dick) event's organizers and shows the dozens (accurate that time) of republican supporters, who simply walked from the event outside with campaign signs provided by the party. Why the tv news plays their game is beyond me...well, actually it isn't...were it not for the amounts of media buys the candidates do each election cycles more than half of the tv and radio stations on the air couldn't make pay role or the utility payment.

Anyway, what do ya-all think about making sure we have plenty of cameras rolling at the next big protest? Then we can stand there waiting for the motorcades taking pictures of them taking pictures of us.

[edit on 15-1-2008 by skyshow]

hey section eight, from what I understand, that wasn't an organized anything...rather people just came out on their own to voice their opinions and are fully within their constitutionally guaranteed rights to do so. If you've ever done that, you would know that they seal off the parameters and then create what is called "free speech zones" they put up the barriers, and so they should, nobody is arguing we shouldn't have any security to keep the people being protested safe...that hopefully is a given by all...what is not ok is abusing the people's constitutional rights and making them in some cases protest a mile away. Even worse is when the police move in on a peace full bunch like that. That is not American. That is the sort of stuff you might expect in Soviet Russia back in the 70's, but not here in the United States, home of the brave and land of the free. But yeah, once again to illustrate my main point...few people are "invited" to be there, or "organized" in any way...they know he [the one they are protesting] is in town and so they dislike his policies or whatever, and decide to show up and hold up a sign. If you watch the video you clearly can see signs hand made on card board and painted on's...it's definitely not an organized event...this is very grass roots, so your point isn't really holding up very well on it's own sir, with all due respect.

[edit on 15-1-2008 by skyshow]

I'm using generalizations to illustrate the point, of how many of your protests you see and hear about are not "planned", but that regular everyday citizens decide to exercise their constitutionally guaranteed right to protest whomever over whatever they like. In this video from Portland they are protesting Bush, I believe...did you read some of the signs the protesters had made on their cardboard...clearly, they were unhappy with Bush and expressing that.

America is all about free exchange of ideas and freedom of speech among other guarantees we see in the constitution and bill of rights...have you ever read the thing? Our government's foundation is the Constitution. Peacefully protesting is not anti-govn't., indeed it's one of the most American things one can do.

Originally posted by skyshow
hey section eight, from what I understand, that wasn't an organized anything...rather people just came out on their own to voice their opinions and are fully within their constitutionally guaranteed rights to do so. If you've ever done that, you would know that they seal off the parameters and then create what is called "free speech zones" they put up the barriers, and so they should, nobody is arguing we shouldn't have any security to keep the people being protested safe...that hopefully is a given by all...what is not ok is abusing the people's constitutional rights and making them in some cases protest a mile away. Even worse is when the police move in on a peace full bunch like that. That is not American. That is the sort of stuff you might expect in Soviet Russia back in the 70's, but not here in the United States, home of the brave and land of the free. But yeah, once again to illustrate my main point...few people are "invited" to be there, or "organized" in any way...they know he [the one they are protesting] is in town and so they dislike his policies or whatever, and decide to show up and hold up a sign. If you watch the video you clearly can see signs hand made on card board and painted on's...it's definitely not an organized event...this is very grass roots, so your point isn't really holding up very well on it's own sir, with all due respect.

[edit on 15-1-2008 by skyshow]

Then by your own definition it is an illegal event. You must have a license to do that sort of thing. It is different how to obtain one in every state and city but it is not a national policy.
Do not kid yourself either, there are national organizations who only exist to protest and they do organize events. People were clearly masking their identies in the video so they were not average joes with home made signs.
In the end babies got hurt. No points were made, no media coverage mattered, just babies got hurt. What a waste.

it is not illegal when you are on a public sidewalk or street in a "free speech" zone. READ THE US CONSTITUTION. Having an "organized" event in a park, or having a march down a street requires a permit, simply being on a public walkway holding up a sign you just made in the alley two blocks away is not illegal. You are talking about the USA aren't you?

and what is wrong with the events that are organized? Huh? Look, if I want to protest Iraq, and protest the Shrub and big Dick, and want to travel around the country and protest every time they get out of the car, I have the right to do that. Would I, hell now, I couldn't stand to see them that much, but that's just me. Thank your lucky stars that we have people willing to stand up for what they believe in. Next week we will be celebrating Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. What a wonderful day it was when Rosa Parks refused to move to the back of the bus...it's in this spirit that America is what she is...she is a beautiful country where we can stand up to abuse and voice our strong opinions on wrongs we feel need to be righted. Were it not for so many cowards who sat around on their thumbs with their heads in the you know what, maybe slavery could have been stopped sooner, equal rights amendments passed sooner, and so sir, it is very American to voice your opinion. What is un American is to condemn such acts because it goes against the very spirit of our democracy.

AS far as the masks go, you may be right, perhaps a few have been at other protests--and so what? Do you realize that they were putting people on no fly lists for simply showing up at protests? I knew someone who knew a democrat canvaser and precinct leader who that happened to during the last big election...the person had to take a bus from the West coast all the way to the e. coast to attend the national convention. So yeah, when you see the police and security people with camera's taping and filming them, it would make sense that if you had sun glasses or a bandanna you might want to put it on. It's because of the corruption and surveillance they did it, common sense tells you that. The irony, is they shouldn't have to, and it further illustrates the point being made by this thread in the first place. I just can't believe you're arguing that the victims of such brutality were the ones at fault! That's insane and completely un American.

[edit on 15-1-2008 by skyshow]

Originally posted by SectionEight
You must have a license to do that sort of thing. It is different how to obtain one in every state and city but it is not a national policy.

Yeah, so sorry but you are wrong here. Seeing as I took an oath to protect and defend the constitution I guess I shouldn’t let you go on in your ignorance of the document that frames our society.

Nowhere in the constitution do you see the disclaimer “offer subject local laws, statues and codes. Offer void if not used in conjunction with proper permits and licensing."

I'll defend the babies before the asshats who put their wellbeing in jeapardy anyday. I say protest all you want, but if you bring a baby and it gets injured you should be liable and subject to severe penalty. People get daycare for tupperware parties, they can get it for a rally.

Police state FTW!

Either shut your mouth and enjoy your life or you'll get your ass kicked!

or......

Either shut your mouth and pay your money to government or you'll get your ass kicked!

Meh, I dunno. When North American Union comes in effect and we'll see how it goes.

[edit on 15-1-2008 by TheoOne]

Originally posted by SectionEight
I'll defend the babies before the asshats who put their wellbeing in jeapardy anyday. I say protest all you want, but if you bring a baby and it gets injured you should be liable and subject to severe penalty. People get daycare for tupperware parties, they can get it for a rally.

Well seeing that the protestors are within the law and the police, in using force, are breaking the law, I would say you are pointing your fingers in the wrong direction.

The police, while committing assault with chemical weapons banned for use in combat, harmed a baby.

Any criminal who, while committing a criminal act (even if they are pigs) harms a child should bear the full brunt of the responsibility.

and if a female decides to go out and chooses to wear red heels and a skirt, does this mean she deserve to be raped? Sir, nobody who is behaving peacefully and within their full civil rights deserves to be shot up with chemicals and beaten with sticks. I strongly suspect and certainly hope that something was learned by this in the enforcement circles because I'm fairly confident that most agencies and police officers are truley trying to do the right thing and keep the peace and protect the citizenry, however without the proper protocols, or without proper training, or even with corupt trigger happy mentality mistakes are bound to happen.

It's terribly sad it happened there, but give the devil her due, they don't always turn out this way. Most times there is tremendous amount of respect and reservation being exercised, not everything the protesters say is always super friendly, and for the most part I think they know the people need to vent a little and express their opinions...but what happens in that video is awful, clearly the attack by the armed men was not provoked as the mop up job suggested. Now if they were over turning cars and breaking windows, sure, "move in boys"..."disperse"....but I didn't see any of that there.

There are other videos about that sad day too...in one that is like 15 minutes or so long, I cried when I watched this middle aged professional woman being interviewed who said her and her husband had a nice home in the suburbs, and worked and were your average good Americans, and anyway, she goes on to say how strongly she feels that what Bush et. al. are doing with this war in Iraq based on lies etc is very very wrong....and that she said she has never ever gone to protest anything in her life, but just felt very strongly this time...anyway, they were all being peaceful, and the next thing you know she is getting beaten by the police...she said she never ever in a million years thought anything like that could happen here in the United States, but it did.

[edit on 15-1-2008 by skyshow]

Ok, here is the thing I don't get, and I'll state it -

I mean, okay, the protesters are standing there peacefully and all, why couldn't the police just communicate with protesters? Like, you could've told them to leave, reasons for leaving, etc. instead of using force?

Yeah, prosters probably would refuse to leave, but why touch them, though? Why send police in front of them? Just asking / wondering.....

Originally posted by TheoOne
Cavscout, who cares really? I don't think there is anything you can do about it. I know you care but I'm saying in general. I mean, we live on a # planet, called Earth...

Here is the thing about it.

I joined the Army and became a Cav. Scout in 2000, before the GWOT, because I really wanted to protect and defend the Constitution.

I was then sent to an immoral war where I was shot, blown up and killed my soul. I am 50% disabled now, from combat injuries.

I watched my friends die, and I watched children die. I saw things no person should ever see.

Now, we did no go to Iraq in order to protect the constitution, however I did join the Army to protect the constitution and joining the Army is what got me over there.

In joining the Army I took an oath that I will never forget, an oath I will uphold for the rest of my life.

I will defend that constitution against it's enemies like section8 wherever I see them, even though I know it is stupid to think I will change his mind.

At least then my service in the military can be for something.

Originally posted by cavscout

Originally posted by SectionEight
I'll defend the babies before the asshats who put their wellbeing in jeapardy anyday. I say protest all you want, but if you bring a baby and it gets injured you should be liable and subject to severe penalty. People get daycare for tupperware parties, they can get it for a rally.

Well seeing that the protestors are within the law and the police, in using force, are breaking the law, I would say you are pointing your fingers in the wrong direction.

The police, while committing assault with chemical weapons banned for use in combat, harmed a baby.

Any criminal who, while committing a criminal act (even if they are pigs) harms a child should bear the full brunt of the responsibility.

Lol, are you serious? Pigs?? Chemical weapons???
Look if you want to defend people with poor judgement who cannot even get daycare for their kids and probably took them there as human shields then go right ahead. If you cannot get child care, stay home. Children come first not cardboard signs and slogans.

Yes, the kids probably shouldn't have been there, but this is not the norm in this country, and so there is no reasonable explanation that you are going to be attacked by the police for protesting. If this were Red China, that expectation might be there, but it's Green Oregon for gods'sake!

My previous statement about to many glasses of wine has been compassionately removed.

[edit on 15-1-2008 by skyshow]

Originally posted by SectionEight
If you cannot get child care, stay home. Children come first not cardboard signs and slogans.

Look, I do agree with you those children should not have been there on the front line, HOWEVER that does not excuse the pigs who assaulted them.

I liked the part with the bubbles lol

I was wondering, do you think the Vietnam war was the first real indicator that civil war was on the way?