'Occupy' types

My only opinion on that video, is that the protesters sitting down were idiots. Yeah, the cops could step over the protesters, and certainly it is a flipped out scene to see the officer stepping over the line to spray them, but the protesters had a ton of warnings, and simply refused to obey what were simple lawful orders. They were well aware of what the refusal meant, in terms of getting sprayed, and so when it happened, it's hard for me to build up any amount of sympathy for them.

This whole movement just seems like a shadow of the civil rights movement, and sadly reflects how pathetic our country has become. I mean you have a group of protesters, than a hundred cell phone users hoping to capture the next Rodney King video, some people laughing (can you imagine anyone laughing as Rosa Park refused to go to the back?, or at MLK Jr's I have a dream speech? Those were serious issues, and demanded serious respect), then you have a cop walking over the protester line to spray them so that the police could move them off of a small piece of pavement. Simply ridiculous on all accounts.

My only opinion on that video, is that the protesters sitting down were idiots. Yeah, the cops could step over the protesters, and certainly it is a flipped out scene to see the officer stepping over the line to spray them, but the protesters had a ton of warnings, and simply refused to obey what were simple lawful orders. They were well aware of what the refusal meant, in terms of getting sprayed, and so when it happened, it's hard for me to build up any amount of sympathy for them.

This whole movement just seems like a shadow of the civil rights movement, and sadly reflects how pathetic our country has become. I mean you have a group of protesters, than a hundred cell phone users hoping to capture the next Rodney King video, some people laughing (can you imagine anyone laughing as Rosa Park refused to go to the back?, or at MLK Jr's I had a dream speech? Those were serious issues, and demanded serious respect), then you have a cop walking over the protester line to spray them so that the police could move them off of a small piece of pavement. Simply ridiculous on all accounts.

This. 100%.

I'm not ignoring your lame stance on the police abuse either JR. I really don't even think it deserves a response, and the fact you are taking up for the police is sickening as is. So you think that it's not ok if other countries put their people in line when they peacefully protest, but it's ok for our country to use it's police to do so against its citizens?...lol Hypocritical to say the least. I suggest you reread what Obama's quote in that picture again, and then tell me if he meant America as well. Apparently he didn't which is exactly why he's allowing that crap to continue on instead of putting his foot up some of those local mayors asses..

I will use incredible restraint and simply say you have no concept of the rule of law and all its implications. Comparing these protests and the police reaction to them as the equivalent of the Arab Summer protests and the governmental reaction to them is the height of ignorance. Peaceful protests in the US happen all the time without confrontations or suppression. These students were clearly seeking a confrontation and they got one.

When a mob gets to choose which laws to obey - it's still mob rule, peaceful or otherwise.

Freedom of speech isn't free if you put a time limit on it or require a "permit" for it. It's a ****ing joke and to defend it angers me so don't even bother doing it. There is no justification unless you simply support a police state...

Guys, you can have free speech from the hours of 8am to 11pm, but only on Monday through Friday. Oh, you have to get a permit and have it approved by our council. Thanks in advance. FUUUCK that. Maybe that's just the anarchist in me.

200 years of reasoned caselaw says you have no clue what you are talking about. At the same time, your position is incredibly hypocritical in light of your call in the "Media" thread to allow the government to regulate the content put out on the airwaves. So - on one hand you want to adopt laws that allow the Federal government to regulate/censor content on the airwaves - but you want to prohibit local governments from reasonably regulating their thruways and public spaces so that everyone - protesters and non-protestors alike can use them? Get a clue.

It's not the anarchist that calls for such hypocrisy, it's the uniformed citizen.

I will go on record and say I support any and all violence against authority in situations where police abuse their authority. Being a cop doesn't give you a right to abuse your position of power to break the laws yourself. People have a right to defend themselves, even if it's against the tyranny of it's own government.

My friend had a great quote.

"Obedient citizens never fixed anything."

Ghandi, MLK would agree - and yet they never called for violence even the face of abuse and violence far exceeding what these students faced. Again, your resolution is something akin to barbarism - I was wronged so I will wrong you. Your understanding of civil society is barely above neaderthal. Yes, police abuse of authority is wrong and, although often not severely or consistently enough, is punished. This situation will be thouroghly vetted and lawsuits will fly, I guarrantee.

This in regards to you harping about them breaking the laws, and condoning the police brutality acts.

See CRed's statement. I agree with it 100%.

So lets take a vote on who was dumber.

A. The Police For Spraying The Kids
B. The Kids For Sitting There Knowing What Was Coming.

We know the smart ones where the kids cheering them on ready to take a photo the minutes the cops started the warnings. If you watch the video one guy on the end gets up and leaves.

it was college students sitting on a sidewalk on their college campus . . .they werent blocking I 95 or obstructing any public walkways or even disturbing the public.

a strong argument could be made that they, as paying college students to UC Berkley, are an exclusive group who get the right of quiet use and enjoyment of the private campus to which they pay tuition.

this whole obstructing the public, public disturbance notion floated out there doesnt apply here imo. It would if this was OWS or some other public area but it isnt.

personally, from seeing the video i think the officers felt kinda stupid for just standing their like lame ducks and the one guy was embarrased/put on the spot so he did something . . .something really stupid.

Their training, for their own protection, teaches them to "disable and disband/disperse". Not "try to disband, get attacked, get hurt or have to kill someone, chaos ensues,...

The protesters were asked and warned...I am no police apologist but in most of these cases they acted appropriately. There are many ways for the protesters to do their protesting just as effectively and comply with the appropriate local laws...in some cases they are choosing not to and suffering the consequences.

And again - This. 100%.

I will use incredible restraint and simply say you have no concept of the rule of law and all its implications. Comparing these protests and the police reaction to them as the equivalent of the Arab Summer protests and the governmental reaction to them is the height of ignorance. Peaceful protests in the US happen all the time without confrontations or suppression. These students were clearly seeking a confrontation and they got one.

When a mob gets to choose which laws to obey - it's still mob rule, peaceful or otherwise.



200 years of reasoned caselaw says you have no clue what you are talking about. At the same time, your position is incredibly hypocritical in light of your call in the "Media" thread to allow the government to regulate the content put out on the airwaves. So - on one hand you want to adopt laws that allow the Federal government to regulate/censor content on the airwaves - but you want to prohibit local governments from reasonably regulating their thruways and public spaces so that everyone - protesters and non-protestors alike can use them? Get a clue.

It's not the anarchist that calls for such hypocrisy, it's the uniformed citizen.



Ghandi, MLK would agree - and yet they never called for violence even the face of abuse and violence far exceeding what these students faced. Again, your resolution is something akin to barbarism - I was wronged so I will wrong you. Your understanding of civil society is barely above neaderthal. Yes, police abuse of authority is wrong and, although often not severely or consistently enough, is punished. This situation will be thouroghly vetted and lawsuits will fly, I guarrantee.



See CRed's statement. I agree with it 100%.

lol our hard earned tax dollars at work people!

Well Jimmy Carter, a lot of the media and others have pointed out opposition towards Obama is mainly because of racism. Here i was thinking OWS protesters were just anti-semitic....

But all the attacks by the left on Cain are not. Thats the funny part.

I will use incredible restraint and simply say you have no concept of the rule of law and all its implications. Comparing these protests and the police reaction to them as the equivalent of the Arab Summer protests and the governmental reaction to them is the height of ignorance. Peaceful protests in the US happen all the time without confrontations or suppression. These students were clearly seeking a confrontation and they got one.

When a mob gets to choose which laws to obey - it's still mob rule, peaceful or otherwise.

I do have a concept of the rule of law. I just don't agree with or support those laws. Many of those laws are put in to control the population. Wouldn't want any unruly peasants bucking the system now do we? Certainly can't have the slaves overthrowing the masters. Ya dig? Peaceful protests do happen all the time, but how many start a world wide spark to reform corporate influence into government and accountability? You know the big boys up there don't like that, which is exactly why I posted this link.

U.S. banks should "undermine" Occupy protesters: memo - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/u-banks-undermine-occupy-protestors-memo-213618820.html)


200 years of reasoned caselaw says you have no clue what you are talking about. At the same time, your position is incredibly hypocritical in light of your call in the "Media" thread to allow the government to regulate the content put out on the airwaves. So - on one hand you want to adopt laws that allow the Federal government to regulate/censor content on the airwaves - but you want to prohibit local governments from reasonably regulating their thruways and public spaces so that everyone - protesters and non-protestors alike can use them? Get a clue.

It's not the anarchist that calls for such hypocrisy, it's the uniformed citizen.

No. I support not allowing news agencies to openly lie and mislead. When it comes to freedom of speech and protesting, I'm 100% behind use of public property to do so. These people pay taxes and should be allowed to protest 365 days a year, 24 hours a day if they want. It's funny you talk shit about me being condescending, yet here you are....now THAT is hypocritical.



Ghandi, MLK would agree - and yet they never called for violence even the face of abuse and violence far exceeding what these students faced. Again, your resolution is something akin to barbarism - I was wronged so I will wrong you. Your understanding of civil society is barely above neaderthal. Yes, police abuse of authority is wrong and, although often not severely or consistently enough, is punished. This situation will be thouroghly vetted and lawsuits will fly, I guarrantee.

See CRed's statement. I agree with it 100%.

So did you support the Afghan invasion? Isn't that retaliation? Meeting violence with violence, yet I am the one that's barbaric and neanderthal? LOLOLOL Keep spinning those records Mr. DJ.

I have a huge understanding of a civil society, and I have a huge understanding of being controlled by the ruling class. You may not like my tactics of violence to offset violence, but lets be honest. Countries were formed and freedoms were won off of violence. I prefer the non-violent way, but I think two people smarter than me said it best.


"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson

_AesVsRvOEo

I do have a concept of the rule of law. I just don't agree with or support those laws. Many of those laws are put in to control the population. Wouldn't want any unruly peasants bucking the system now do we? Certainly can't have the slaves overthrowing the masters. Ya dig? Peaceful protests do happen all the time, but how many start a world wide spark to reform corporate influence into government and accountability? You know the big boys up there don't like that, which is exactly why I posted this link.

U.S. banks should "undermine" Occupy protesters: memo - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/u-banks-undermine-occupy-protestors-memo-213618820.html)

You have "a concept of the rule of law" but support mob rule to ignore law when it is inconvenient? LOLOL. Wow. Your arrogance is stunning. "Slaves overthrowing the masters"?? Ahhhh, I see, when logic and reason fail, you'll just resort to a little hyperbole. For a bunch of "slaves" those students were amazingly well fed & clothed and certainly seemed to be enjoying the rights which others fought for. Ya dig?

No. I support not allowing news agencies to openly lie and mislead.

News agencies that openly lie and mislead? If it ain't the truth, why are you afriaid of it? Who decides what is fact and what is opinion? Who says "I forbid you to broadcast this"? For an anarchist, you are quite the trusting soul!! (You probably found nothing ironic in the Soviet's naming their party newspaper "Truth").

When it comes to freedom of speech and protesting, I'm 100% behind use of public property to do so. These people pay taxes and should be allowed to protest 365 days a year, 24 hours a day if they want. It's funny you talk shit about me being condescending, yet here you are....now THAT is hypocritical.

I got no problem with them using public space to protest. At the same time, that space doesn't belong to them. Others pay taxes too and have the right to use space. If a bunch of Tea Party folks (who also pay taxes) show up and want to use the same public space to protest, I guess we just let'em duke it out.

We are part of a civil society in which all must make accomodations for others (see - it's that rule of law thing again). These students absolutely have the right to use the space for their speech and, in fact, to deny them based on the content of that speech is illegal. I mean, I fricking spelled it out for you earlier.

I know - law confuses you. We should just get the mob together and string folks up who disagree with you. Might makes right after all.

So did you support the Afghan invasion? Isn't that retaliation? Meeting violence with violence, yet I am the one that's barbaric and neanderthal? LOLOLOL Keep spinning those records Mr. DJ.

You're right- b/c what we should have done to stop the Taliban from funding and supporting those who kill Americans was to hold a sit-in in Kabul. Or maybe start a letter writing campaign in their oh-so-free-press. I am sure we could have petitioned their govt., elected members of their parliment or in other peaceful ways effected change from within. :doh:

And yes, you are barbaric when you would chose violence in this situation. As usual, you compare apples to oranges and call them equal. You keep telling yourself your ends justify your means while urging people to bash in the heads of police and chuck firebombs at them as they try to lawfully disburse crowds. Sounds f'ing brilliant to me.

I have a huge understanding of a civil society, and I have a huge understanding of being controlled by the ruling class. You may not like my tactics of violence to offset violence, but lets be honest. Countries were formed and freedoms were won off of violence. I prefer the non-violent way, but I think two people smarter than me said it best.


"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson

LOLOL ... You got nothing - what you have is a "huge understanding" of warmed over syndicalist/anarchic philosphy that has proved itself both ineffective and impractical (see Spain circa 1938 - I suggest Orwell's "The Road to Catalonia"). Sorry, chosing (and advocating) blood and violence in a society where peaceful demonstrations/movements have historically created massive change, even in the face of violent opposition, is misguided and will ultimately bring, not change, but repression.

Here, in the US, there is no need for blood, either from tyrants or patriots. It's why we have courts, laws and means of redress.

A Man For All Seasons:
William Roper: So now you'd give the devil the benefit of law?

Sir Thomas More: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the devil?

Roper: I'd cut down every law in England to do that.

More: Oh, and when the last law was down, and the devil turned on you, where would you hide, Roper, all the laws being flat? This country is planted thick with laws from coast to coast, man's laws not God's, and if you cut them down -- and you're just the man to do it -- do you really think that you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? ... Yes, I'd give the devil the benefit of the law, for my own safety's sake."