Denver Protesters Outraged Over Makeshift Razor-Wire Jail in Denver Warehouse :video:

reply to post by GAOTU789


First, if the Montebello, Quebec Police have taken over the law enforcement role in Denver, CO, we have more problems than either of us are aware of. And, yes, I do have a problem with undercover police officers attempting to incite a riot. But, again, please don't pretend to be so naive as to believe all riotous behavior is caused by "agent provocateurs".

Secondly, my use of quotations was merely intended to distinguish between free speech and the violence and vandalism, which some people believe to be protected "free speech".

I am very proud and defensive of our First Amendment right to free speech, which gives you and I the ability to have this discussion here. I am, also, very proud of the other nine amendments, given the title of the Bill of Rights.

As a side note, and somewhat off topic, I am also a firm believer that the Second Amendment is the only thing that insures the others remain intact.

Originally posted by WTFover
So.....Get back to me when someone is actually locked up before they have done anything wrong. Then you will have a vocal advocate on your side.

Geee, isn't that the whole point of the "free speech zones" I've mentioned? To corral people like cattle away from areas where their peaceful assemblies won't be noticed? I'll still take my place in front of the building where I'm protesting without getting in the way of people going in or out...

Besides, all you have to do is look in newspaper archives & history books to find plenty of examples where peaceful assemblies have been attacked by law authorities...I don't feel inclined to point them out to you, because you can only learn if you have the desire to learn.

Since you seem to prefer joining the "cattle call" behind the fence, I'll leave you to it. It does seem only right to let you keep your Right to Choose as long as you let me keep mine too.

[edit on 17-8-2008 by MidnightDStroyer]

Where is it? Someone know? I will go and take pictures of it and post them here.

The cross-streets that is, I am in DENVER.

[edit on 17-8-2008 by pluckynoonez]

As I read this I keep thinking of the Boston Globe want ads in the 80's
wanted: protestors $10/hr

By the way do any of you know what the Kent state riot in the 60's was really about? Seems the town would not allow adult students married, working and living in the town the RIGHT TO VOTE!

I am all for peaceful protests, however I resent having people PAID to protest as has been done. The detention area? BEATS STANDING IN THE RAIN FOR HOURS SURROUNDED BY IDIOTS WITH GUNS.

Also are you aware that protests are no longer allowed in Washington DC?

Originally posted by SectionEight
My opinion is that the Bill of rights applies to all citizens but the extremist groups, be they left or right, are using this to hide behind. A faceless organization with no social security number is not what the Bill of Rights was intended for.

You got that totally wrong. The Bill of Rights is a partial list of Natural Rights, unfettered by citizenship or geography...I say that its only a partial list because the Supreme Justice is authorized to enumerate other Natural Rights, such as the Right to Travel Freely for example.

These Rights were endowed by the Creator that set forth the Natural Laws of the world: Whether or not you believe in a Creator is beside the point...The Natural Laws exist & all living things on this planet must abide by them or perish. They are human rights & must be applied to all people or they are worthless to everybody.

Originally posted by SectionEight
We may as well start saying insurance company lobbyists are protected by the bill of rights if that is the case. They are villified for representing their corporate masters, it is just a more high class form of the same shortcut tactics.

The main difference between peaceful protesters & lobbyists is completely different...Protesters are exercising Rights, lobbyists are bribing Government Officers with campaign contributions...The crime is in the bribery & pedaling influence for profit, not the fact that they talk to the government. You're comparing apples to oranges, dude.

Originally posted by WTFover
As a side note, and somewhat off topic, I am also a firm believer that the Second Amendment is the only thing that insures the others remain intact.

That's a statement that I can't argue...And neither could Charlton Heston.
Source: Supreme Law Firm: Email Section: "Ben Hur" on the Second Amendment (excerpted):

The Second Amendment: America's First Freedom By Charlton Heston At the National Press Club, September 11, 1997

Today I want to talk to you about guns: Why we have them, why the Bill of Rights guarantees that we can have them, and why my right to have a gun is more important than your right to rail against it in the press.

I believe every good journalist needs to know why the Second Amendment must be considered more essential than the First Amendment. This may be a bitter pill to swallow, but the right to keep and bear arms is not archaic. It's not an outdated, dusty idea some old dead white guys dreamed up in fear of the Redcoats. No, it is just as essential to liberty today as it was in 1776.
------------
The original amendments we refer to as the Bill of Rights contain ten of what the constitutional framers termed unalienable rights. These rights are ranked in random order and are linked by their essential equality. The Bill of Rights came to us with blinders on. It doesn't recognize color, or class, or wealth. It protects not just the rights of actors, or editors, or reporters, but extends even to those we love to hate.
--------------
You, of course, remain zealous in your belief that a free nation must have a free press and free speech to battle injustice, unmask corruption and provide a voice for those in need of a fair and impartial forum.

I agree wholeheartedly ... a free press is vital to a free society. But I wonder: How many of you will agree with me that the right to keep and bear arms is not just equally vital, but the most vital to protect all the other rights we enjoy?

I say that the Second Amendment is, in order of importance, the first amendment. It is America's First Freedom, the one right that protects all the others. Among freedom of speech, of the press, of religion, of assembly, of redress of grievances, it is the first among equals. It alone offers the absolute capacity to live without fear. The right to keep and bear arms is the one right that allows "rights" to exist at all.

[edit on 17-8-2008 by MidnightDStroyer]

reply to post by MidnightDStroyer


The bill of rights does not apply to lifeless entities, such as the ones which are promoting this "back to '68" demonstration. It can be argued the protestors are actually standing in as proxy representatives for these organizations, not representing themselves for their individual rights.

reply to post by SectionEight


A lifeless entity can promote something? Maybe I`m wrong, but something that is lifeless can not promote anything, humans can, so the Bill Of Rights DO apply in cases like this.

Protesting hasn't worked for a while. The reason the Vietnam War stopped wasn't because of a bunch of people with signs getting angry. It was because there was no point anymore and we had lost more than would be gained from winning.

Protests have become so popularised and watered down. Bring in a band and food and people will join. But if you stand out for more than one day no one will be with you. You can never lock away a true protester. Even when they are locked up they are fighting.

If these camps would have been opened up 60 years ago, which they were, people would still protest and do nothing. people have to give stuff up to get things done.

Have a large scale strike. Stop buying certain products. Get on news channels and act like a person who knows what they are talking about instead of a lunatic who is just some crazy extremist.

Seriously try to get things moving. If people are so bent out of shape about a camp for protestors than be willing to be the protestors who are imprisoned.

Nothing happens without major changes. having a big group of people with a bunch of signs only gets the attention of police, others protesting and small government officials.

Most protestors do it so that they feel less guilty. Lets see some real protestors who want to see the world happier.

reply to post by FiatLux



Do you understand the concept of a corporation? It is a legal entity for people to hide behind, you sue the corp not the board personally. The people who run the extremist organizations who organize these protests hide behind the people, kind of opposite but same concept. In this case the bill of rights is used as a shield to protect the extremist organization, which is a lifeless entity, not something the Bill of Rights was intended for.

reply to post by SectionEight


the right to assembly is another right, dude.

read a book.

Originally posted by WTFover
So.....Get back to me when someone is actually locked up before they have done anything wrong. Then you will have a vocal advocate on your side.

One instance comes to mind, the 2004 Republican National Convention in New York City, at Pier 57. It looks like the same thing is being done in Denver.

[edit on 18-8-2008 by Flory]

It is going to warm my heart to see all those Young Republicans in the makeshift jails. I hope they get tasered and clubbed a bit along the way. Send em back to Rush Limbaugh with a few bruises and maybe they will think twice about "Operation Chaos" next election.

What, you didn't think that the Democrats were protesting their own convention did you?

[edit on 8-18-2008 by groingrinder]

So, they are expecting trouble at the event and are preparing holding areas for those arrested? Kinda looks like they got it all sen up.

If I was there I'd be wary of those in the crowd wearing hoods or masks and acting in a violent or confrontational manner towards the police. Not that I would ever suggest that the "authorities" would plant agitators in the crowds of protestors. Why, that would just be ridiculous......wouldn't it?

Originally posted by NinguLilium
Protesting hasn't worked for a while. The reason the Vietnam War stopped wasn't because of a bunch of people with signs getting angry. It was because there was no point anymore and we had lost more than would be gained from winning.

The Vietnam war stopped because we got our asses handed to us. You are probably too young to remember that, but I am not. I think the CIA had probably made several billion dollars on the heroin imported into the USA in body bags at that time so as far as they were concerned, the war had done it's job.

reply to post by billybob


Yes, yet another right lifeless entities hide behind, your point is?

An example, a group known as Not In Our Name. They have an impressive list of signatories, you can read them on wiki, protests are organixed in that entities name. Now the signatories are not the founders, the Revolutionary Communist Party is. When the poor chump out on the street doing their dirty work gets in trouble at these protests you don't see any of them bigshots sitting in jail next to them and the real surrogates who put up the money and logistics for these professionally done protests, the Revolutionary Communist Party, are going to take no blame in any rioting which causes personal injury and property damage. They are already planning their next attack.
Point is you can't expect people to get in an uproar to defend the saps who go to these protests when they are just mindless sheep being used for someone elses agenda.

References used in above post.
Not In Our Name Wiki,
en.wikipedia.org...

Revolutionary Communist Party Wiki,
en.wikipedia.org...(USA)

reply to post by WTFover

As a side note, and somewhat off topic, I am also a firm believer that the Second Amendment is the only thing that insures the others remain intact.

This is not the only one that keeps the remaining intact. What it takes to keep the Bill of Rights intact is the ability to whole-heartedly disagree with the way a person lawfully expresses their rights and be willing to fight to preserve their rights.

Have you heard of the Westboro Baptist Church? In my opinion they are some of the most vile human beings on the planet. If you are not familiar with them please Google them and you will see what I mean. When people heard the things they were protesting and the despicable statements they made, many called for it to be put to a stop. What we have to realize is that if we put an end to their right to free speech we put an end to ours as well.

In my opinion the right to free speech is something you support or you don't. There is no grey area.


[edit on 18-8-2008 by harvib]

Originally posted by SectionEight
reply to post by GAOTU789

 

A peacefull assembly of townsfolk is not what these charades are. They are organized by extremist groups with agendas. The proper channels of getting regulations and laws passed through State and Federal legislation is too long and laborious a process for them, they want a shortcut and use protesting as a leverage, some may call it holding the system hostage for ransom. Give us our way or we will protest. The lackys on the street holding the signs have no idea why they are even there usually and only cling to rhetoric of the current what do I hate today theme to keep them there.

That's exactly the line that all dictators take prior to a "cleansing". Read a history book.

Ironically enough the British Government 240 years ago could say EXACTLY the same thing about certain colonists......ooops.

reply to post by malcr


That's a foolish notion, no little protest is going to cause a revolution in todays day and age, although that IS the main goal of the professional protest organizations.
The debate here is whether to get all up in arms about pre security measures taken because a bunch of dumbass protestors bragged they were going to make it like "68" and throw human feces at people on national television.
On a side note, if they are going to be carrying bags of their own excrement with them, I don't see why they need latrine services in lockup.

Originally posted by SectionEight
the majority of US citizens won't give a flying hoot and probably enjoy the spectacle.

i wouldnt even enjoy seeing you get locked up, despite how deadly your venom is

free speech ftw

detaining protestors ftl

reply to post by SectionEight


wait a minute, arent you protesting the protestors who are protesting the protest prison?

shouldnt we lock you up for protesting the protestors who are protesting the protester prison?

i mean you are actually protesting right now arent you?
lol...just thought that was a funny coincidence (ironic?)

i wouldnt consider myself as protesting your protest tho, i just think of it as pointing out your folly