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.

 

OP/ED: The Republican Convention: It's 1968 All Over Again.

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 01:56 PM
link   

This is shameless and irresponsible rabble-rousing. Get a grip! Everyone's voice will be heard, especially on election day.


I am amazed that, after the 2000 Presidential election, anyone actually thinks that the US 2004 election will be free and will not be fixed.

How can you Americans stand for it!? You fought off authoritarian control and became a free nation and now you are in the process of losing that freedom and you are doing nothing.

As for the protests I am quite sure they will turn violent. There are reports that several US domestic terror groups, including the infamous Weathermen Underground Organistion, will be in attendance. I can see it turning into a full scale riot.




posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 01:58 PM
link   
We are letting it slip, and we're just saying "be nice" because we don't want to lose our cars and tv's.

We need to wake up.



posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by deeozz
I found this link very interesting. It is kind of long, but I think it is worth your time to at least read the quotes and the last couple of paragraphs. It seems like something that could never happen, but if that is the case, then our govt. will eventually destroy itself. Check it out:

wethepeoplesstateoftheunion.blogspot.com...




From the link:



Since overthrowing our government would not be logical, amending the way in which it operates would be very logical and as Abraham Lincoln said, we the people have a constitutional right to do that. Since we can no longer trust our congress to make decisions and pass bills which benefit the American people, on November 2nd, in addition to voting for President and Vice-President, voters should have the option of voting on a law which would give the public the right to vote on bills after our leaders prepare them.


Actually, when we don't trust our representatives to make decisions we are suppossed to vote them out.

Realistically, do you have any idea what it would take for us the people to make every decision? Ever actually read a bill? Ever looked at how many there are each year?
There aren't enough hours in the day to sift through this stuff for we the people. Quite frankly, our representatives can't be doing it all either, they have to be relying on staff and constituent feedback (as reported by staff).


How many people do you know that even read the full document for a referendum question to understand the impact of it before pulling a lever.

There must be a way somewhere somehow to fix all this, but sadly, I don't think this is it.

(Good reading though)



posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 02:17 PM
link   
Just curious about something. Does anyone recall if there were protest during the DNC convention when Clinton ran for re-election? Was there this level of protest at the RNC when Reagan ran for re-election?

My point is that this president has so divided this nation he is now creating such a sense of anger among our citizens I do not know how he thinks his actions are so good for us. Does this level of anamosity not show just how divided we are and how bad for the US Bush is?

Whether you think Kerry is good or bad he is at this point unproven, therefore we should give him a chance. It is obvious Bush is a divider who does not value our rights and looks to hold back those who disagree with him. Anyone with a loyalty oath and this level on containment of citizens cannot be good for us long term.



posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 02:28 PM
link   
At the minimum, Kerry allows people to criticize him at his rallies.



posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Relentless
Gools, cstyle226:

Normally I would agree with you. But this time I really think the country is in a very fragile state and tempers are runnng high. I think that a lot of good has come out of civil disobedience in our history, but now is not the time.


Now is absolutely the time!!!

When should protest be allowed? When everything is running along nicely? Things get ugly when the people are not listened to and they have to resort to getting the public's attention away from "reality" tv.

The convention is a media event and protesters will have a stage upon which to gain a voice. You can bet they will. That is if the media does their damn job!

To quote Rage Against The Machine..."If not now ... when?"



posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 02:41 PM
link   
I have to agree with Gools.



posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 02:42 PM
link   

How can you Americans stand for it!? You fought off authoritarian control and became a free nation and now you are in the process of losing that freedom and you are doing nothing.

As for the protests I am quite sure they will turn violent. There are reports that several US domestic terror groups, including the infamous Weathermen Underground Organistion, will be in attendance. I can see it turning into a full scale riot.


WE got rid of one King George ...



posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 02:45 PM
link   
It's time for King George Bush II the Monarch to be overthrown, as I am confident he will steal this "election" as well.



posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gools

Now is absolutely the time!!!

When should protest be allowed? When everything is running along nicely? Things get ugly when the people are not listened to and they have to resort to getting the public's attention away from "reality" tv.

The convention is a media event and protesters will have a stage upon which to gain a voice. You can bet they will. That is if the media does their damn job!


How did we go from having to protest in designated areas to not being allowed to protest at all?

I'm thinking about "big picture" here. 96% of this country has made up its mind in this election. Half are voting for Bush - the other half for Kerry. The remaining 4% will decide this election. Think about that.

The message of the protests should be directed to that 4% - tell them why they shouldn't vote for Bush. If the protestors play Boston tea-party, especially in New York, they run the risk of alienating the only people whose vote matters. Just like in 1968.



posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 02:47 PM
link   
Doesn't our government monitor this site?

Our founding fathers must be spinning in their graves...



posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gools

When should protest be allowed? When everything is running along nicely? Things get ugly when the people are not listened to and they have to resort to getting the public's attention away from "reality" tv.

The convention is a media event and protesters will have a stage upon which to gain a voice. You can bet they will. That is if the media does their damn job!

To quote Rage Against The Machine..."If not now ... when?"


I'm not saying it shouldn't be allowed. My point is I don't think any of the street protests are going to change anything, and they have potential for great harm.

Edit: I want to clarify my concerns are for the illegal protests that are planned.

Protests no longer even need to be held in the streets, this country has been raging against the machine all year (okay longer), there is nothing new that will come out of the street protests in NYC at this point, we have heard it all before (my opinion).

NY can be a volatile place, the country, heck the world is in a volatile place.The scale is too grand. There are people flooding into NYC for these protests. I have grave concerns, because anything that gets out of control in NYC this week will have resounding repercussions to the rest of the country and our freedoms. There cannot possibly be enough manpower to keep it under control if some wacko gets all fired up and forgets what a peaceful demonstration is.

Sorry, I just don't have enough faith in the ability of THAT MANY of our fellow americans exercising their freedoms responsibly on this one when everyone is SO angry already. I do hope I am wrong though.

[edit on 28-8-2004 by Relentless]



posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 02:50 PM
link   
But you said it yourself...everyone is angry. We've been angry for a long time, and what has changed? Tell me...



posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bleys
I'm thinking about "big picture" here.
...

If the protestors play Boston tea-party, especially in New York, they run the risk of alienating the only people whose vote matters. Just like in 1968.


So am I.

Except the big picture is much bigger than the one represented by the 5% percent of the world's population who think they rule this little planet!

Don't get me wrong.

I'm not advocating violence. I'm more of a John Lennon "Revolution" type.

The fact that a few protesters decide to get "radical" and make the evening news is a problem and DOES take away from having an informed debate. The thing is, this is where we are at right now and a crackdown on free speach backed by an increasing police state is no way to address the issues.

Like I alluded to above, when people are not listened to and no compromises are forthcoming who is to blame when violent protests erupt?

You seem to be saying that it is the protesters that are to blame and that it is their fault that nothing changes because Joe Public is a moron.



posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 03:07 PM
link   
The thing is this President even as governor had free speech zones, thats right every inch of ground in the USA is supposed to be a free speech zone but this guy disignates area for protesters to stand and its always a long way off. Police come in and arrest and strong arm protesters its a common practice, there are pictures of a grandmother in a wheelchair being strongarmed by some cop in 2000. I will look for the picture someone here had a thread on it complete with pictures if anyone can find it. It is alarming how passive we have all become, and the thing is our news media should be ashamed of themselves they don't report it because they do not want to lose access to him and his staff. That is the main problem is if they all reported it he would have to deal with them. All Presdients and politicians use the media so he could not cut them all off from having access but they don't stand together. Just like in truth all the people, no matter, what political affiliation all should stand up and condemn this but they don't. The truth is united we stand divided we fall and we are falling hard and fast.



posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gools
Like I alluded to above, when people are not listened to and no compromises are forthcoming who is to blame when violent protests erupt?



Ugh! You weren't even quoting me on that one - but I'll say it - the people who lose it are the ones to blame. Not being listened to does not justify violent protests erupting. Being frustrated does not justify going beyond reason, but we all know it happens.

And this is exactly what I'm worried about. Does anyone think an eruption at the convention that goes bad (violent) is going to do anything for the precarious state of our freedoms at the moment?



posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gools
You seem to be saying that it is the protesters that are to blame and that it is their fault that nothing changes because Joe Public is a moron.


Yes, your average Joe Public is an uninformed and ignorant moron. They want their sound bytes and pictures spoon fed to them in 30 second increments. But that is also a plus, because their opinion can be changed. The information doesn't even have to be entirely accurate - look at the 527 ads on TV this month.

And yes, some protestors are to blame. While most of the protestors care - deeply - about their issues, the rest are there to make arses out of themselves. They are a PR nightmare for people who actually have a point.

Oh and while I'm thinking about it. It really is nice to be able to debate with someone on this issue without in turning into a pissing contest. But then again you have always been a gentleman in your posts.


p1

posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 03:32 PM
link   
I work in Manhattan and think its the height of stupidity to hold the convention here. New York is already the biggest target for terrorism in the U.S. Then you add in the most hated man in the world and a huge symbolic convention, and it makes for the perfect terrorist target. It seems like the chances of an attack occurring are being increased all for political gain.

A poll in Friday's NY Times said that 52% of new Yorkers think a terrorist attack during the convention is likely, while 86% of convention goers thought it was a good idea to hold the convention in NY. It seems like there is a huge difference in opinion between the people of the city, and the people holding the convention. The poll also revealed that 70% of New Yorkers planned on voting for Kerry.

This is all besides my biggest gripe, which is that the convention is going to fu.ck over my commute so badly.


p1

posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 03:34 PM
link   
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all. I like a little rebellion now and then. It is like a storm in the atmosphere." --Thomas Jefferson to Abigail Adams, 1787.



posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 03:35 PM
link   
At The end is going to be the way in wish the security forces, police, homeland security or others are the ones to set the stage for how well the public will behave.

I they do their job on respecting peaceful demonstrators minimal confrontation will happend.

If they violate the civil rights of the demonstrators the build up of anger is going to take over.

To many groups to many people chaos will erupt from this volatile environment.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join