100 Protesters Taken to Temporary Center

Originally posted by burdman30ott6

I made nothing up whatsoever. I cited clips of people chanting "f-this" and "we want war" and that was what the clips were of. Just watch any of them and see that there are some doing that. The FOX news clip posted from last night her at ATS in the "sprinkler system malfunction" thread showed exactly that.

Burdman, I have actually been to a couple of protests back in the day. There are usually a number of idiots in the crowd, trying to provoke arrest for whatever ungodly reason, even though the majority are peaceful and well mannered. And, sometimes even the peaceful ones can be provoked by the authorities into yelling obscenities or getting violent. It's unfortunate that the news only focuses on these few morons (or, perhaps hired goons to make the real protesters look bad).

This is the exact reason I don't watch the news anymore. It seems mainly to exist in order to warp the public's perception of events.


edited for spelling


[edit on 27-8-2008 by chickenshoes]

reply to post by chickenshoes


OK then, honest question... let's assume that the majority of the people here at ATS would fall into the "peacefull protest" category (This is hypothetical, clearly, as I would say in reality most of the would be protesters here would end up turning it into a huge circus.) One thing that they seem to share, peacefull or otherwise, is a common hatred for the police and a "the instant you pigs do something..." threat capacity. If you're involved in a peacefull protest and suddenly a group of nonpeacefull protesters arrive and try to incite, why allow it? Isn't it logical to turn the same type of "just try it" emotions you harbor against the ops back onto anyone who is basically doing what you accuse the police of doing, only from the other side of the fence?

If it is true and it's a few bad apples giving the whole barrel a bad smell, and you are among the good apples in the barrel, why wouldn't you do anything you could to chuck the bad ones out of the barrel? Expecially considering they're giving you a bad name and risking your safety by inciting the cops into reacting against the entire group.

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
If it is true and it's a few bad apples giving the whole barrel a bad smell, and you are among the good apples in the barrel, why wouldn't you do anything you could to chuck the bad ones out of the barrel? Expecially considering they're giving you a bad name and risking your safety by inciting the cops into reacting against the entire group.

Because the whole point to peaceful assembly is to remain peaceful.

What could you as a peaceful assembler do to stop the violent from ruining the assembly?
Nothing, short of becoming violent toward them yourself.

Hence, doing something about them would only attract the police to intervene anyhow.

Lose lose situation.

At least by staying peaceful, you can sit in jail with a clear conscience, instead of sitting in jail knowing your guilty.


Either way, the peaceful ones still wind up in jail.

As proven by this event.

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
I'm amused that the brownshirts blocking public roadways, intimidating journalists, reportedly destroying trees and upturning garbage cans & newspaper machines as they illegally parade down the street, and innundating local residents with fear that if they don't hate the war, the president, the police, and everything about the system then they better stay away from said brownshirts lest they be mobbed is OK but setting up free speech zones isn't. Their right to freedom of speech & freedom to demonstrate does NOT trump any other citizen's rights, regardless of how loudly they say it does.

Every clip I've seen so far has a large contingent chanting "F this" or "f that" or "We want war" or "kill -fill in the blank-" Personally I'm impressed the cops haven't started busting heads open. Shows an admirable level of restraint and demonstrates that the cops do have a level of respect for people... sadly I can't say the same about the protestors.

You're in the wrong place to be on the Cops side.

In fact, I don't think there is a situation that merits agreeing with the Police.



[edit on 8/27/2008 by dalan.]

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
Redneck, at what point do you say they'll label them "terrorist?" Will it be when they start actually rioting and terrorizing the residents of Denver (or whatever city they decide to "demonstrate" in) or will it be when they start conspiring to do so? I love how all of this is assumed to be peacefull protests when, in reality, the organizers of this have no intention of it being peacefull. They have an agenda, and agenda which dictates that one of their top goals will be to enact self fullfilling prophecy... push, push, push the cops & the government until you finally get the response you wanted and then spin around and say "See! See! We told you! POLICE STATE! POLICE STATE!" while hoping and praying that the pleebs are either dumb enough or blind enough to not point out that the whole damn thing was instigated by the protestors themselves.

Wow, you are one of those guys who wouldn't question the reason as to why he is getting the RFID chip.

Well that's right, you take it like a good little boy, we hear enough of your opinion from Fox News. If you don't agree with the EVIDENCE for what is going on in America right now, then what are you doing on this website? Did you come here just to kick around some conspiaracy theorists?

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
reply to post by chickenshoes

 

OK then, honest question... let's assume that the majority of the people here at ATS would fall into the "peacefull protest" category (This is hypothetical, clearly, as I would say in reality most of the would be protesters here would end up turning it into a huge circus.) One thing that they seem to share, peacefull or otherwise, is a common hatred for the police and a "the instant you pigs do something..." threat capacity.

Well, the ones I've been to have never had that mentality. Like I said, there are generally a few in every group that are champing at the bit to get arrested and, I guess, make an example out of themselves, but on the whole, I've found that not to be the case.

If you're involved in a peacefull protest and suddenly a group of nonpeacefull protesters arrive and try to incite, why allow it? Isn't it logical to turn the same type of "just try it" emotions you harbor against the ops back onto anyone who is basically doing what you accuse the police of doing, only from the other side of the fence?

Here again, I and most other protesters I've met and spoken with harbor no such "just try it" emotion against the ops [sic] (I think you meant cops?). I have sought only to have my opinion voiced by physically carrying signs and marching when all other means of change have been tried and failed. I accuse the police of nothing in my post, you're assuming. You know what happens when you assume, don't you?

If it is true and it's a few bad apples giving the whole barrel a bad smell, and you are among the good apples in the barrel, why wouldn't you do anything you could to chuck the bad ones out of the barrel? Expecially considering they're giving you a bad name and risking your safety by inciting the cops into reacting against the entire group.

Good question. The groups I have been in, like I said, only had a handful of folks like this. Most of the time, they could be reasoned with or encouraged to leave before havoc breaks out. In a smaller group this is much easier, but in larger groups you may simply not get there in time. And if you're suggesting the protesters use violence against each other, well, that would defeat the purpose, now wouldn't it?

I stand by my statement that the news media blows certain portions of events out of proportion in order to skew the public's perception of them. It's called disinformation, and unfortunately, it happens frequently.

[edit on 27-8-2008 by chickenshoes]

reply to post by burdman30ott6


To their credit, when surrounded by all those cops, the protesters began to chant "nonviolent" over and over. Then the camera crew that was filming (at least the version I saw) was moved out of filming range before the protesters were arrested.

I am all for peaceful protests. But honestly, I can't say how peaceful I'd be able to stay if surrounded like that and trapped by menacing police. How menacing did those police get, and how tight did they trap those people before there was enough incident to pull out the spray and start arresting them? I've been in ugly crowds before. The survival instincts tend to kick in before you even know what's going on.

reply to post by dalan.


Ah, I see we're highly threatened by any viewpoint which doesn't agree with your own. Last I saw, ATS permitted all sides to voice their opinion and question anything posted here. If it has officially become a place for only those who dispise the government, please let me know ASAP.

Your RFID chip comment made me chuckle.

reply to post by chickenshoes


I agree with the manipulatory media comment you made. I'd take it a little further, however, the media works both sides, overblowing whatever bad the protestoers & activists do as well as overblowing any bad the police do, to make sure they manage to incite both sides because controversy and anger puts butts in front of TVs and that equals advertising dollars.

I did not intend to paint you with any brush. My anti-police mentallity comment was more directed at anyone who harbors that feeling. Based on what you are saying about how just a handfull of jackasses can taint an entire crowd of people, I have to wonder why it doesn't seem to be an accepted fact that it works both ways? Yes, there are some cops who are jerks, but that doesn't mean it is any fairer to use those jerks as grounds to call out the entirety of the police than it would be for someone to use the protesters who are acting like jerks & breaking the law to paint all protesters as dangerous lawbreakers.

Do you see what I am getting at? More importantly, do the people who like to run around calling all cops "pigs" see the hypocrisy?

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
reply to post by dalan.

 

Ah, I see we're highly threatened by any viewpoint which doesn't agree with your own. Last I saw, ATS permitted all sides to voice their opinion and question anything posted here. If it has officially become a place for only those who dispise the government, please let me know ASAP.

Your RFID chip comment made me chuckle.

No, not threatened just aggravated.

Why would you even want to support Police anyway? They don't do anything useful and figuring that America is a free Nation and Republic why do we have them again??

If you like Cops and "security" then move to Europe. I am perfectly capable of securing myself, figuring I do have a 2nd Amendment right to Bear Arms.

-----> You are wrong to side with the cops. hahaha

Thank the gods there are some who "get it" on here. History has shown time and again that the most effective protests begin in the life of the individuals and education (protests like we see now a days do nothing to educate, but actually tend to turn others off).

I am not sure what the point of these public protests are supposed to be doing as far as getting the government out of your lives. It is about as moronic as someone coming across a grizzly bear that is looking the other way and instead of effectively trying to "remove" oneself from the situation, they run toward it with a small stick screaming "I know you are going to kill me you bastard! I just *know* it." And if the retard was one of these ppl protesting and by some small miracle survived the grizzly's provoked attack, they would complain... "omg! look at what it did to me. I didn't do anything to deserve this." dumb arse

HELLO!!! You don't like being controlled, but yet you are proving to them and everyone else that you NEED TO BE CONTROLLED!!!

If you believe you are free, then you are. The most effective way to make it known that you don't need to be controlled is to become self sufficient as an individual and then as small communities. Hit them where it hurts effectively. Running around in the streets is only effective in getting their grip to tighten.

The protests are empty words and empty actions. It is all for show. They do nothing to prove that you deserve your freedoms.




[edit on 27-8-2008 by justamomma]

Originally posted by justamomma

-----> You are wrong to side with the cops. hahaha

Is there something funny about that?

Nice rolly-eyes.

reply to post by dalan.


Yes, there is! It is the "wrong" placed in there without stipulations that makes it funny.

Let's say there is a hostage situation where a man is holding a gun to the head of a 3 year old child. A police officer effectively sneaks up behind the gunman while he is distracted by other cops and is able to take him down thereby saving the life of that innocent baby.

By your statement, it is wrong to side with the police officer.

"Police" is merely a label. The label does not make the MAN good or bad per se. His actions cannot be defined as good or bad across the board simply bc he has a uniform and badge that identify him as a Police officer.

It is the ignorance in your statement that was worthy of a good and




[edit on 27-8-2008 by justamomma]

reply to post by dalan.


It is the fact that America is a free nation that is the very reason we need the police. Freedom is not absence of laws nor does it exactly lend itself to the honor system of following a set of societal rules. There is freedom and then there is anarchy. The only difference between anarchy and fascism is that in anarchy it is the lawless who are ravaging the victims whereas in fascism it is the government doing it. Anarchy is merely freedom with no police or law enforcement. Not the America I want to live in and certainly not the America our founding fathers envisioned.

reply to post by justamomma


Then someone should have shot the guy before he got to the child.

Problem solved.





[edit on 8/27/2008 by dalan.]

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
reply to post by dalan.

 

It is the fact that America is a free nation that is the very reason we need the police. Freedom is not absence of laws nor does it exactly lend itself to the honor system of following a set of societal rules. There is freedom and then there is anarchy. The only difference between anarchy and fascism is that in anarchy it is the lawless who are ravaging the victims whereas in fascism it is the government doing it. Anarchy is merely freedom with no police or law enforcement. Not the America I want to live in and certainly not the America our founding fathers envisioned.

I didn't say we had to live in a "lawless" society.

I said I don't need Cops to protect me, I'm an American, I can carry a gun.

reply to post by dalan.


Yeah, not only can I carry one, but I do carry one. That's besides the point, however. What happens when we have a minor altercation between people that escalates into folks pulling the firearms and people being shot to death in the streets? No cops anymore, so there goes the idea of anyone being arrested and brought to justice... guess it is up to the friends and relatives of the deceased to dole out some justice, so off they go to take down the shooter. Uh-oh, now the shooter has been killed, so his friends and relatives are pissed off and looking for justice. See the cycle?

I do not depend on the cops to protect me or to protect my own. I do, however, depend on the cops to keep a basic orderliness about the nation which would surely deteriorate into hell on Earth if we didn't have them doing their jobs.

reply to post by dalan.


Are you kidding me? What if he didn't do anything to warrant being shot before he grabbed the child?

The cops are not the problem! There are CASES where A cop is the problem, but the main problem is some of the laws that they HAVE to protect. You can't fault all cops bc of the laws. And you can't fault all of them bc of the actions of a few power trippers. There are regular joes who have power trips, so am I now to be anti everybody? (hmm.. actually )

Why are you so ignorant to the fact that freedom comes with responsibility? I do agree that cops should not be protecting us from ourselves, but I am all in favor of them taking control of situations where one person is imposing onto anothers right to life and its pursuits.

I am all for us being allowed to arm ourselves and to protect ourselves from crime, but I am also going to opt for someone with more experience handling situations such as the one I mentioned and enforcing a punishment on the said perp.

You just don't get it. Your ignorance is a shining example of one of the reasons why this country is going in the direction that it is

Originally posted by patrickrpg
I think they are doing some good, I mean just look at all the laughter they bring to us here.
I first thought they should just send the hippies to a peacful country, like Iraq, where they can protest the war in person, but then I relized they were storming the Democrates. The I was satisfied. Nothing I like more than heckling a Democrate.

I like your point of view, great spectacle and I hope the videos keep coming in of the dumbarses getting themselves beat down, makes for great entertainment.

We the people should enact a nationwide law that a guilty violent protestor loses their right to vote, maybe that would give them time to grow up and something to think about before they hit the streets. We need harsh and swift laws for justice to combat these violent protestors. Violent protesting is against the law and not protected by the consitution.
Make it a federal crime with a whole beuracracy behind it. The description could be simple, if found guilt of assault either felonious or misdemeanor during the attendance of a public assembly, loss of voting rights mandatory sentencing. Length of voting loss at descretion of judge minimum 2 years maximum lifetime.

Then people would see them and realize they can't vote anyways and pay them the zero attention they deserve.