People should be allowed to peacefully protest if they want to.But I have been watching the latest protests with disgust.The have been vandalizing,stopping traffic,infringing on others rights,and well just being a nuisance.
The are costing the city of San Francisco over 500,000$ a day for extra police.Not to mention the police are now pulling investigators off the job to help with crowd control.
Protesters have gotten out of hand and need to be dealt with.I'am thinking we should hit where it hurts,their wallets,or the wallets of their parents.They should be made to pay for all the damages they are causing.Not just a slap on the wrist fine,but for full damages.I do not see why taxpayers should have to pay for all the damages.
If they do not have the money to pay for damages then they should be forced to do community service for a year cleaning up the streets and so forth......
Any one else have any ideas?

Why dont we just round them all up and put them in a concentration camp? I hear FEMA has rooms already to go.

So you think they should be allowed to destroy peoples property,infinge on peoples place of business,pull people out there cars and hit them.These are things I find unacceptable.

They should'nt be allowed to protest in a time of war. One thing is they ain't going to change Bush's mind. Two they are distracting the polic mainly in NY, who are supposed to be watching out for terroists. While they are arresting those dummies, some terroist could be planting a bomb in the Empire State Building.

I'm so glad our boys are out risking their lives.
I didn't have a good morning when I heard about the helicopter crash since my wee brother is a Royal Marine and is involved in the helicopter side of things.
Lets just hope that the oil is safe.
I have to go now the zip on the back of my head has slipped down and some of the stuffing is hanging out.

I think that violence in protests just shows disregard or lack of respect for one's nation. The fact that the protests are causing the American taxpayers money is not cool but doesn't mean Jedi that they should be oppressed. Once you take away the right to peacefully protest, than they can find OTHER ways to protest. Yeah they have used violence in protest, but have they ever protested by using violence??? Once they can't protest, they will protest with violence. Still they protest with violence for peace. Is that not stupid???

I don't think anybody wants to take away the right to protest.But the protesters need to be resonsible for their actions,and if they keep getting out of hand, then those protests need to be stopped.My idea is to keep protests peaceful.I think the people that cause the damage are the ones that should pay for it.If the protest is sponsered by an organization,then they should be responsible for damages.

Yeah I agree with you Zion.Right now I'am more worried about people shooting or beating protesters.I have talked to several people who had to deal with protests in San Francisco.One of them has about a 1000 dollars worth of damage to his car thanks to the protest.Some of them are going to start carring baseball bats with with them.The next time some of these people start damaging things, it will not be the car that has dents in it.

Protesting should always be peaceful...it serves no purpose but to create hypocracy if it isn't peaceful. I have protested here in NZ during the recent War Marches in this country...and those protests were predominately peaceful. In fact, if anyone started giving the Police or public any hassles, they were quickly told to get lost...the Police don't need to be burdened any more than they already are - and the Public don't need to be accosted, have property damaged or in any way attacked or inconvenienced.

After all, it is essentially the opinion of the Public that any protestors must seek to gather in their favour...and becoming violent or unruly or unlawful does exactly the opposite.


...though seeing as this IS a Conspiracy based website...hmmmm...I wonder if there would be any possibility that there might be government sponsered/supported 'protestors' whose aim/mission is to inflame the situation, bring negative press upon the Protest Movement and subsequently turn public opinion against it.

...or maybe I just need to quit wearing this tin-foil cap so much...



Peace,
ALIEN

[Edited on 21-3-2003 by alien]

Maybe the protesters understand that totally peaceful protests go unnoticed. The call for a recount to get a prestident elected went unheard, instead 5 judges selected one.

Protests should be peaceful, but by same sideing, police should not attack protesters that pose them no threat., Video out of California, clearly showed a officer hitting 2 women, Unarmed women , with his club.

This has the potential to get out of hand, lets hope the dust settles quickly

Don't the protesters have it wrong? Do they have the right to protest or do they have right to assemble peacefully as guarenteed in the Constitution?

Right to protest
Right to assemble peacefully
Troy

Two days ago I went to my fourth peace walk against this war.

You guys are correct. There are some real wanks that try to ruin it. Like these guys that stepped in front of this girl's truck, pushing their signs against her windows (one even tried to open her door). Luckily, some of us told these wanks to back off and to let her through...

Whenever you see a protest get violent, please keep in mind that there are government agencies that make protesters look like idiots intentionally. Ie.; if the government is pro war and demonstrators are pro peace, what better way to make them seem irrational than to plant violent protestors in the crowd...

All it takes are 3 or 4 people to whip people up in a frenzy...

-ß-

Gosh Darn Freedom of Speech!
Tough finding a GOP parrot these days who is more disgusted with children bein blown assunder rather than 'damn protesters' pushed to fury by an immoral & illegal administration's actions putting us on the brink of world war.

Protesters should not be pushed to fury. They should assemble peacefully, and protest peacefully. All these laws apply to pro-war ralliers too. I haven't seen anything about a pro-war rally going bad.

Why do we have violent anti-war protests?

Well I agree with what most of you guys are saying here. I don't want to take the apathetic approach but I know some of the organisers of the Hyde Park March 15th Rally to which 2 million people came. What good did it do though?

I guess it showed the UK and US governments that the eyes of the world were on them...but to me it looked like half the people just wanted a cheap day out frankly. Then we had another protest here in Brighton and I was getting DAMN irritated listening to these young nail polished, desinger labelled posh birds talking on their mobiles saying "Oh yes, well I'm just going to go home and get changed for this anti war protest. Ha ha, yeah Steve's going to be there too, we'll have to keep an eye out."

I mean, it's like protest if you believe in something or at least know what the hell you're talking about. But if you're just trying to look cool...well I think that's a lot more callous than the pro war people they're shouting against. (not that I personally think pro war people are wrong myself - I've lost my bias now I've learned more about the situation - I don't know what to think any more.)

<<>>


US and UK are willing to do what UN isn't. UN at this point is useless because they could have sent troops in.

Originally posted by troylawson
<<>>


US and UK are willing to do what UN isn't. UN at this point is useless because they could have sent troops in.

No, they could not send in troops, unless they are afforded troops to send in. Whose high-tech planes and such and troops get sent, anyway?
While the U.N. is irrelevant, the relevant parts of the U.N. are acting.