My G20 trip, Reflection Thread: READ!, page 2

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 48 times

reply posted on 3-10-2009 @ 06:19 PM by whatukno

The part that people are missing with the G 20 protests is that while YES we do have a right to free speech and to peaceably assemble, the G20 protesters weren't there to be peaceful.

These were anarchists, they had no intention of being civil or peaceful. They planned and had lists of buildings they were going to smash. They pushed dumpsters on fire down the road then upturned them in intersections. In general they were trying to incite a riot.

Anarchists have no message other than anarchy. They promoted violence against police. They wanted a confrontation with police at the G 20.

reply posted on 3-10-2009 @ 07:34 PM by Boomer1941

The sad thing about all this is, sometime, somewhere your probably going to see the populace showing up at one of these events that are infringing on the people rights and they're going to be armed and not with rubber bullets. When events like this take place the police and military are stating their position and have labeled themselves as enemies of the citizenry and thus will probably become open game by the citizens if they do decide to organize an armed resistance. It's too bad because everybody loses, but this must remain a free country.

reply posted on 3-10-2009 @ 07:43 PM by whatukno

reply to post by Boomer1941

Im sorry, it's hard to defend the right to free speech and freedom to assemble when the people that are assembling are doing so for the expressed purpose of destroying private property and vandalizing public property.

It's quite unfair to come down on police for trying to stop a mob from inciting a riot.

Don't get me wrong, I believe in people standing up for what they believe in, but when the people protesting don't believe in anything, and just want to cause mayhem, it looses something in the translation.

TEA party protesters have a specific agenda, and a clear message. They do things the right way, they organize, and peaceably protest. This is right, it's well within their rights as members of a free society.

Anarchists on the other hand when they talk about smashing windows and overturning dumpsters and smashing police cars have no agenda other than mayhem.

The protesters at the G 20 had no intention of being peaceable. Instead the intent was to incite riot. That makes them wrong and the police had to control the situation.

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 12:30 AM by Raverous

Maybe I missed something but from the videos I didn't see the anarchists doing anything rash until the police started being douchebags.

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 12:38 AM by whatukno

reply to post by Raverous

It was planned ahead of time on anarchist forums. Looking into this, they wanted to make sure that the police had to do something. Planing on smashing windows and breaking things.

Some posts from "protesters" were even disappointed at the lack of destruction they caused.

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 01:27 AM by tempest501

STAR AND FLAGGED my friend.

Just wanted to say a big thank you for the great work you did and to all the people.

My thoughts are with you America, If you have some positive enrgy to throw back across the pond to England that would be great too since Ireland just voted Yes to lisbon Treaty =C

My respect to you.

God save us all if these trends keep on. Lets hope there is a mass awakening soon.

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 01:34 AM by tempest501

reply to post by whatukno

You should go check out the video of Jason Bermas and Luke Rudkowski. They were being peaceful and yet the police acted like thugs.

www.wearechange.org...

(sorry i could not embed it but at work at mo and youtube is a barred site. its def on the wearechange website though)

I hear what you are saying and its wrong for the minority to hijack these events and trash the place. They were the minority and it would not surprise me the way things are going if they were put there on purpose to stir things up.

It happened over here in the UK when G20 was here. The police were just as brutal here too, infact one Officer is up on a possible manslaughter charge.

Peace

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 02:03 AM by Copernicus

Ive watched the videos but one thing is not clear to me. What started the police actions against the demonstrators? I mean the use of tear gas and rubber bullets. Was it that people refused to split up because the chief of police declared the assembly illegal?

Does he even have the right to do that? Seems like a very convenient way to get rid of demonstrators. Just declare any assembly illegal without reason (because I didnt hear any reason in the video) and the police are free to do what they want to split people up.

So basically, that means there is no right to have a large demonstration anymore. And that means there is no freedom to speak out in public without risking your own police coming down on you like you were a criminal.

Once again, look at France for inspiration:

Thursday’s day of action throughout France in defence of jobs, the purchasing power of wages and social services, called by the eight major trade union federations, brought an estimated 2.5 million workers and youth onto the streets of some 200 cities and towns. Some small towns reported the largest demonstrations in many years. Workers went on strike in great numbers, as did high school and university students. Opinion polls indicate that up to three quarters of the French population support or sympathise with the strike.

January 2009 - 2,5 million people demonstrating in France

Please note the last part: "Opinion polls indicate that up to three quarters of the French population support or sympathise with the strike.". This is very important, and this is why it works in France. People support people. United States needs to get a lot better at this.

[edit on 4-10-2009 by Copernicus]

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 02:13 AM by whatukno

reply to post by Copernicus

Of course you have a right to peaceably assemble. But what people don't have a right to do is to try and start a riot.

There were places set up specifically for the demonstrations. When the people went off the demonstration route, starts smashing windows, setting fire to dumpsters, the police had to react.

It's a case of a few bad apples. Anarchists ruined it for everyone and caused a lot of property damage in the process.

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 02:19 AM by Copernicus

reply to post by whatukno

Yeah. If the anarchists started causing damage to the city, I understand the measures taken by the police. But its a question of what is a "peaceful" demonstration. Sometimes it seems that peaceful is equivalent to "not being noticed".

A large demonstration should disrupt daily activities and really get noticed by everybody, otherwise there is no point. They may as well stand in the middle of a forest screaming if they are not allowed to make a little bit of a mess.

Are the french demonstrations peaceful? I guess it depends on the definition of what is peaceful. They disrupt entire cities, which probably could be classified as a terrorist act of war in the United States. They dont really have any "places set up for demonstrations" there. Thats why it works and why it gets taken seriously by the government.

[edit on 4-10-2009 by Copernicus]

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 02:29 AM by sanchoearlyjones

reply to post by ugie1028

Hearing this broke my heart, and i teared a little bit, im not sure if it was the tear gas, or it was the words of an oppression nation. these were the words of the people screaming out for help, when none arrived, there were the words of a very brave woman, one i regret not meeting, and shaking her hand to say thanks.

ugie, I gotta say I wasn't feeling all that well today, but I found Your thread, and really liked it.

At first reading what You wrote above I did laugh because of the "tear gas" comment, but the whole thing together does show almost an epic adventure. Damn the NWO.

Peace in the resistance,

Sancho
S&F

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 02:30 AM by whatukno

reply to post by Copernicus

Before you get a couple hundred stars for that post, let me remind you that protests go on in this country all the time without any violence at all by the police.

The Tea party protests for example. You never hear about police action at those now do you? That is because Tea party protesters don't go around smashing windows and setting dumpsters on fire.

So it makes me wonder if it's overbearing police or is it people trying to start a riot and getting just what they asked for?

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 02:35 AM by Copernicus

reply to post by whatukno

I think people who are frustrated with not being listened to eventually turns violent, thats why its important to really communicate and listen to groups of people who are not happy in a society. All they really want is to get listened to. Violence is a consequence of the frustration that comes from not being listened to.

Its the same as when a parent tries to get a kid to stop doing something. The conflict becomes worse and worse and eventually the parent may use violence against the kid as a last resort. To me, people using violence are that parent. They have tried everything but nothing works.

[edit on 4-10-2009 by Copernicus]

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 02:36 AM by Novise

reply to post by ugie1028

Exactly, this walk out day, stopping all production and commerce peacefully is what it will come down to. The people will have to be literally willing to starve to death to succeed. But that doesn't have to happen if we are prepared with food and water stocks/sources and have some luck on our side. Don't get me wrong I think many would die from this sort of peaceful revolution, but I know I'd be willing to go (in this way at least). I don't think it's that crazy or selfish if that is my own choice and what I feel deep down, then it must be true for others.

The only thing stopping me from stepping out of the system right now is my family. I feel an obligation to it. It is this human part of us that probably counts for so much right now - so many people are in the same boat, they just care so much about their family and how can you blame them. But I'm beginning to think the greater good must be taken into account and enough is enough. Most people will hold up society for the good of their families, they just don't want anything to happen to them. This is probably the final thing the globalists/system has in terms of controlling us.

If anything is ever going to happen we have to be able to all but ensure the safety of the people's families... Seems impossible but maybe we can come up with something. Distractions, diversions... get the news cameras and military/police chasing our front lines around while family is taken care of by an organized group of caring trustworthy people in total secret. Seems impossible, must think!

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 02:40 AM by Neo_Serf

reply to post by whatukno

You must study the history of 'agent provacateurs' and wonder why the so called 'anarchists' were mainly 6'2 dudes with crewcuts.

Regardless of if the violent disruptors were agents or not, does the actions of these few invalidate the redesses of the many? Was the LRAD justified?

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 02:45 AM by Neo_Serf

PS:

props to the OP! Youre a shining example of what the majority must behave like if we are ever to turn the tide of tyranny. IE: some farkin ballz. *high fives*

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 02:50 AM by Novise

Originally posted by drac88
The thing is though is that it's really easy for everybody to just say that we need to stop it. But how? I ask. You can't just say you're going to stop something as huge as this and then wait for something to happen.

I suggest everyone get in touch with their inner self. The people we are against have no connection to the spiritual universe. That is why they are the enemies. They are completely disparaging towards common people because of their own inner evils. The truth is that people on a good path will have the upper hand in the end, only if we search deep inside and embrace our full capacity as conscious beings.

When wolves roamed the arctic and great planes for years they were forced to adapt to the conditions and predators threatening them. Because of doing this, they developed abilities that made them the supreme species in their entire environment. Right now we are being threatened by massive forces that call for one very serious development on our part. We need to survive. And adaptations came into fruition because of species' need to survive. What will we need to change about ourselves? We will need to advance our consciousness to the next level, so we can leave our evil, slimy leaders in the dust.

I tried to shorten the quote but so much of it was pertinent and useful. When I read your post on survival and adaptation I think to myself, "we will survive spiritually." Now there is no way to be certain of this, but it may be that simple. Like how it is said that demons hate you because Jesus loves you and you can go to heaven and they can't. So they just pettily pick at you and try to hurt you. Nobody is going to get out of this life alive anyway. Just using that as a metaphor, our situation on earth may be very similar to this Christian reference.

I just don't understand, at this point, why haven't more waken up? Most of the tea party people are unaware and just doing what the TV/Fox News tells them to. People still try to show off how "individual" and smart they are when they organize and they write the stupidest things on the signs still. Where are the aware? So rare...

It seems to me that a very big key to our survival will be diversion. Stay peaceful, but dictate where the incidents will be, so others will be safe. Make the front lines the target, while the underground survives and nourishes the front.

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 02:56 AM by Sundancer

Thanks for putting it all together for us Ugie. New at this or not, you did a great job and we're proud to call you a brother. Good job!
S&F

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 03:07 AM by whatukno

reply to post by Neo_Serf

Of course! THAT MUST BE IT! All the anarchists that were setting fire to trash dumpsters and throwing rocks through windows were all plants by the cops and everyone else were just innocent bystanders that just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time while cops were fighting each other.

They even set it up by setting up a website and listing all of their targets beforehand.

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 03:07 AM by tempest501

Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by Copernicus

Before you get a couple hundred stars for that post, let me remind you that protests go on in this country all the time without any violence at all by the police.

The Tea party protests for example. You never hear about police action at those now do you? That is because Tea party protesters don't go around smashing windows and setting dumpsters on fire.

So it makes me wonder if it's overbearing police or is it people trying to start a riot and getting just what they asked for?

Please go watch the video on we are change. You will see these people were not rioting and Luke was on his Bullhorn telling people to be peacful. When the police came and said they had to leave they couldnt because the police had surrounded them, Beat them and gas them. At the start of the video they were stoping a girl from going home with her home work. Most of the people in this case were young people (only around 300 people).

Just please give it some thought otherwise, How long before your police murder someone too. Ian Tomlinson was just trying to go home in London when the protest were going on here. He wasn't rioting or causing any disturbance.

www.guardian.co.uk...

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 >> ^^TOP^^