It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

ACLU sues Pittsburgh, Secret Service over G20 protest permits

page: 2
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 14 2009 @ 04:49 PM
link   
reply to post by SunnyDee
 


I meant what I said.

Stand in the way of my car waving your signs and I will push you to the side.

Don't like it then get out of my way.




posted on Sep, 14 2009 @ 06:22 PM
link   
For masse protests to be effective , don`t they have to be, at the very least, disruptive ?




Naomi Wolf on the nature of the modern protest movement.



posted on Sep, 14 2009 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by SunnyDee
 


I have no complaint about the protesters being there. I am more than willing to put up with any delay and I am willing to go out of my way as much as possible to avoid them. That's my end of the deal. They can protest to their heart's content. Understood?

I'm eventually going to have to go right past the entrance to the Convention Center, no way out of it. My concern is that I don't want to have anything thrown on me for the reasons that I explained. That is my main concern. Somebody approaches me with anything like that and as I said they are going to be looking the muzzle of a pistol.



posted on Sep, 14 2009 @ 07:36 PM
link   
reply to post by UmbraSumus
 


Great Clip



posted on Sep, 14 2009 @ 07:42 PM
link   
reply to post by UmbraSumus
 


Damn! What a babe!



posted on Sep, 14 2009 @ 08:03 PM
link   
reply to post by JIMC5499
 


Jim I agree 100%... next week is going to be VERY interesting around here.



posted on Sep, 14 2009 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by UmbraSumus
 


Your post should have ended this discussion.
Naomi Wolf said it better than anyone here could possibly say it.

Screw the damned permits. They are the very REASON why protests no longer work.
Pittsburg needs to be gridlocked.

I also question the motives of anyone who would suggest that a gridlocked protest that impedes their route to WORK would lead to violence on their behalf. With a glock, no less.

Of course, those sentiments are exactly what the Government WANTS to hear from its parrots, or possibly its employees. Those sentiments are what the Government wants you TO BELIEVE is just.
In fact, it is just the opposite. Those sentiments are the very ones used to keep you in check.

I hope the protests number BEYOND the tea party protests in D.C. Far beyond.



posted on Sep, 14 2009 @ 08:25 PM
link   
reply to post by JayinAR
 



The type of people who go to these types of protests are why these types of protests don't work. People get pissed off at their disruptive, disorderly and illegal behavior, and whatever message they might have had is lost. Whenever I see them at the IMF/WorldBank protests, I just assume they are wannabe drug addict hippies, who are there because they have nothing better to do, or to get laid. They make the protest about them, rather that whatever cause they may have.



posted on Sep, 14 2009 @ 08:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by SunnyDee
reply to post by jd140
 


Wow, Ok , I shouldn't bother, but here goes....it's not all about you. Sometimes people need to do things for hopefully the better of us all and all you 2 seem to care about is your own path?


I agree with the guy. There's no reason for him to take another route to work, none. There's no reason for anybody to throw anything on anybody else there either. If I were in his shoes, I'd be locked, loaded, and would put extra holes in anybody that thought it is his/her right to throw anything at me. Protest is good, throwing things is assault, and if the thrown item is biological it can be considered assault with intent to kill or cause bodily harm. In which case he's completely justified in killing the idiots.



posted on Sep, 14 2009 @ 08:53 PM
link   
reply to post by stevegmu
 


Whenever I see a group of 1 million protestors in the streets of D.C. I wish that 1) I could be there among them and 2) That the protests were EVEN LARGER and completely shut the city down for DAYS!!!

Meaning that jerkoff with a glock who is ready to use it can't get to work for about 4 days if he can't find an alternate route.

My bet is that if he is THAT concerned with getting to work he CAN find another route and is simply choosing to threaten people practicing their constitutional right of peaceable assembly because it doesn't fit with his worldview.

Screw him and anyone like him.

In a perfect world, once the cops moved in to move the PEACEFUL assembly out under illegal pretenses, the peaceful assembly would turn into a powder keg.

And perhaps THIS is what you have a problem with. People who are NOT WILLING to submit to the unlawful advances of an increasingly totalitarian Government.

To say anymore on this matter runs me the risk of being in trouble. So I'll let you draw your own conclusions on what *I* would consider "acceptable" if some asshole wanted to wave a glock at me, or godforbid fire it, for protesting an elitist oligarchy hellbent on enslaving you, me AND our children for generations to come.



posted on Sep, 14 2009 @ 09:33 PM
link   
It is unfortunate that the few 'protestors', who WILL attend with the sole purpose of destroying something, cause the restriction of permits and reactions like those of JIMC5499.

He can only base his expectations on what he has experienced. However, I find it unproductive to express such intentions, here.

The key word, as always, is 'peaceful' protests. What I never understand is why the trouble makers aren't stopped by the others, who greatly outnumber them.



posted on Sep, 14 2009 @ 09:42 PM
link   
reply to post by JayinAR
 


No, I have a problem with the destruction of public and private property, the lawlessness of certain types of protestors, the types who say they are going to throw marbles under the hooves of police horses, the ones who chain themselves to the doors of buildings, the ones who think it is all about them, and don't even know why they hate the G20/WorldBank/IMF. If they can't protest in designated areas, follow the law, or put up a bond for possible damages, they shouldn't be allowed to protest. They don't do anything for their cause, other than turn people against them.



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 08:58 AM
link   
Why is my statement so hard for some of you to understand? Did you flunk reading comprehension in school? I have said repeatedly that I have no problem with the people who are going to protest. I have said that I am willing to tolerate the crowds and have no problem with them being there. I have said that I will willingly accept being inconvienced by the possibility of having to change the route that I take to work. Damn! I think that I am going WAY out of my way to support their right to protest!

My main problem is that the building that I work in is right NEAR where the summit is being held. I can only go so far out of my way. My employer would close for the summit, except that we have a deadline that must be met. The streets near the summit will be blocked to traffic, so I already have a hike to get there. Anybody who knows the layout of Pittsburgh knows that the Convention Center is bordered by a river on one side, so my choices of a route are pretty LIMITED.

The ONLY thing that I have stated I have a problem with is if some A$$H@LE tries to throw any crap on ME. They can yell, wave signs and sing Kumbayah for all I care. If somebody tries to throw stuff on or at me, my respect for THEIR right to protest ends there and my RIGHT to protect myself begins.

Here's a good one for you. If these protestors keep this thing peaceful, without violence, they will get quite a bit of support from people in the area. If they don't the local police will get quite a bit of cooperation in locking them up. The City of Pittsburgh is already trying to figure out how to spend the windfall in fines that they are going to get from this summit, the same way that they look forward to the increase in income from the start of football season.



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 12:00 AM
link   
Any update on a ruling allowing protests or not? There was supposed to have a ruling on it at the beginning of the week... So is it today or tomorrow or....



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 07:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


They can use Point State Park, but cannot camp overnight.



The mayhem has begun.

The tires have been flattened on over 20 police cars.

A group was forcably removed from a local cemetery. Their intent was to desacrate the grave of a Pittsburgh Police officer that was killed last April.

The target list is out:
Starbucks
Giant Eagle (local grocery chain)
PNC (local finance company....technically my employer)
Bayer
etc.

The main threat now is that a group of morons are planning on stopping cars in the local tunnels, flattening the tires and setting the cars on fire during rush hour.

Their intention is to gridlock the entire area. So much for a peaceful protest. I just hope that nobody dies trying to get to one of the local hospitals. They are all downtown.

I'm supposed to support these a$$holes right to protest? Jim Quinn said it best this morning. "Three words that the protestors need to be concerned about "Shall Issue State"."

[edit on 22-9-2009 by JIMC5499]



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 07:44 PM
link   


Their intention is to gridlock the entire area. So much for a peaceful protest. I just hope that nobody dies trying to get to one of the local hospitals. They are all downtown.

Protesting without any real gridlock doesn't do ANYTHING. The leaders don't give a flying X about people protesting.

But of course, gridlocking the entire area shouldn't destroy private property but should block everything.



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 10:41 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


Thank you ProtoplasmicTraveler for clearly stating what I wanted to say. The city, Secret Service or the president has no right to tell US citizens to shut up. I hope all the protesters carry a copy of the Constitution.

Unfortunately our government HAS murdered protesters.

A small band of Veterans gathered in Washington to protest Congress' delay in the payment they were promised. The President ordered the eviction of the Veterans.

At 4:00 that afternoon the Army killed and wounded many of the marchers as well as a few by standers, one of whom was a United States Senator. As the day progressed into night the Army attacked the Veterans main encampment with small arms, bayonets, machineguns and tanks. In all it is reported that some 1,600 people, mostly woman and children were killed



...The following morning some 2,400 people were herded into cattle cars and were taken down to the Florida Everglades. There they were separated into small groups of 50's. The women and children were lined up first as the Veterans were lined up along the tracks behind a machinegun...

...gave a speech about patriotism calling them all traitors as the first group of women and children were forced to wade out into the swamp and to stand in front of a machinegun. He continued his speech until the last of the women and children in the first group had entered the swamp and were lined up in front of the machinegun. Then [he] gave the order to fire and the first group fell lifeless into the swamp. Then the next group of women and children were marched out into the swamp where they too were gunned down by the machinegun. This continued one group at a time while the Veterans were forced to watch as their wives and children were executed by the soldiers.

When the last group of women and children had been executed the Veterans began singing patriotic songs as they marched out into the swamp. Tripping over the lifeless bodies of their loved one which were floating in the water, they continued singing until the last Veteran's lifeless body splashed into the mixture of blood, mud, and swamp water. It is said that the gators ate very well that day as the soldiers tore up the tracks and left the area.

This account of what happened to America's World War I Veterans is true and as accurate as is possible. The official story about what happened to the Veterans and their families that were forced into the boxcars with Federal Troops perched on top of them differs greatly from how it was told to us by eyewitnesses just prior to their deaths in 1990. The United States Government would like people to believe that they were shipped across the country looking for a new home and eventually lost some where in the vastness of what is America.

The fact remains that America's Veterans are the only group of American citizens ever gunned down and killed by Federal Troops for marching on Washington, D.C..... Only America's pride, her Veterans, have been gunned down for demanding that which they were promised by the Congress of the United States.

For those interested in verification of the events of the 1932 Veterans March on D. C. check out "The Glory and the Dream: A Narrative History of America 1932-1972" by William Manchester. Source


May President Hoover, General Douglas Macarthur and General Patton rot in hell for firing upon their own citizens and forcing fathers and husbands to watch their loved ones die. I realize this is not well documented but I have seen the "white washing " of a different incident with my own eyes so this does not stretch my credibility.




top topics



 
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join