Yeah.. the police really needs some punishment after the incidents.. I saw it in person, it was rediculous..

___________________
Upcoming:

Michael Andrews Feat. Gary Jules - Mad World (Grayed Out Mix)

i wasnt there so i cant really say who's more to blame, but honestly i belive both share some fault. the police may have acted with too much force but there were also violent protesters who definitetly were breaking the law. I remember reading that the protesters actually tried entering the hotel to disrupt the talks.
some started fired agianst police lines:

vandelism and trespassing:

throwing milk at the police, seriously who would do that in normal daily life if they got pulled over or something:

pathetic graffiti our tax money has to pay to repaint:

and then lastly they were guilty of being ingnorant hippies:

ok i'm joking on the last one, well maybe just a little.

anyways as i said i bet you guys will be able to find images of police brutality, all i'm saying it's not only one parties fault obviously both sides showed guilt. personally i'd side with the police because i get the impression that the protesters went there to pick a fight. I dont know if you saw, but a lot of protesters came with their own gas masks, were they expecting something to happen? why protest right infront of the police when you can do so peacefully at central park or something. and wtf is screaming at the police going to do, i bet the cop in front of you doesnt have a clue when it comes to politics let alone 'connections' with the local FTAA rep. go write to your local representative or something, become politically active dont put on a pathetic hurtful show of public disobedience

___________________
If God is the answer, it must have been a very stupid question.

ya its interesting.. sometimes I really wonder what the constiutional framers intended when they granted freedom to rally - as even back at the begining of the US, under George Washington's time they didn't really put up with any sympathy of rallies, especially when they got a bit violent. (Shaw's rebellion might be a good example)

___________________
SAVE ZIONIST MUSTARD: BUY ZIONIST KETCHUP!


Click here to support the free mustard alliance.

quote:

Originally posted by Izzy throwing milk at the police, seriously who would do that in normal daily life if they got pulled over or something:

Hehe, kinda funny. And the guy has to remain calm and standing until ordered otherwise

___________________
1+1=10

"we didn't do anything to provoke the cops" = Throwing rocks, bottles, other things. Verbal Abuse. Threatening police. Exposing ur ass to the cops.

If u can't respect the rules of a peaceful protest and assembly, why even call it one?

___________________
Thank You and Goodnight

quote:

Originally posted by Izzy anyways as i said i bet you guys will be able to find images of police brutality, all i'm saying it's not only one parties fault obviously both sides showed guilt. personally i'd side with the police because i get the impression that the protesters went there to pick a fight. I dont know if you saw, but a lot of protesters came with their own gas masks, were they expecting something to happen? why protest right infront of the police when you can do so peacefully at central park or something. and wtf is screaming at the police going to do, i bet the cop in front of you doesnt have a clue when it comes to politics let alone 'connections' with the local FTAA rep. go write to your local representative or something, become politically active dont put on a pathetic hurtful show of public disobedience

words of wisdom!

___________________
Thank You and Goodnight

this sort of brutality has become all too common...

the fact that these sort of protesters are forcibly shepherded into "designated free speech" areas is as disturbing as it is inconguent with the tenets of an open and democratic society...

___________________
agenda:


[Dark Disco|Frozen Balearic|Gay Biker-House| Boogie-Trance|Heavy Electronica|Soft-Goth]

quote:

ACLU Slams Classified FBI Memorandum Directing Law Enforcement to Engage in Protest Suppression Tactics November 23, 2003 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: [email protected] WASHINGTON - The American Civil Liberties Union today denounced a classified FBI intelligence memorandum, obtained by the New York Times, which gives police detailed instructions on how to target and monitor lawful political demonstrations under the rubric of fighting terrorism. “Attorney General Ashcroft has dismissed critics of the Justice Department’s tactics as 'hysterical' and has even said that such criticism aids the terrorists,” said Anthony D. Romero, ACLU Executive Director. “But this bulletin confirms that the federal government is targeting innocent Americans engaged in nothing more than lawful protest and dissent. The American people deserve an explanation for what is clearly a return to the days of J. Edgar Hoover’s spying tactics.” According to a front-page story in today’s New York Times, the memorandum was circulated last month to local law enforcement agencies around the country in advance of mass marches and rallies in Washington, DC and San Francisco against the U.S. occupation in Iraq. The memorandum, the Times reports, details how protesters have sometimes used “training camps” to rehearse for demonstrations, the Internet to raise money and gas masks to defend against tear gas. It describes lawful activities like recruiting demonstrators, as well as illegal activities like using fake documentation to get into a secured site. “It is troubling that the FBI is advocating spying on peaceful protesters, but even protesters who engage in civil disobedience or other disruptive acts should not be treated like potential terrorists,” Romero said. Of particular concern is one section warning law enforcement about protesters’ use of videotaping as an “intimidation” technique. Most mainstream demonstrators often use videotape during protests to document law enforcement activity and, more importantly, deter police from acting outside the law. Citing no specific intelligence of suspected unlawful activity by the protesters, the memorandum describes, in detail, protest tactics and strategies that should be tracked by law enforcement officials including the FBI Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTF). While saying that the FBI possesses no information about any planned unlawful activity, the bulletin urges local law enforcement “to be alert to these possible indicators of protest activity and report any potentially illegal acts” to federal authorities. Importantly, the ACLU said that it had already seen proof that peaceful activities were being monitored by the JTTF. Documents recently obtained by the ACLU of Colorado as part of its “Spy Files” lawsuit against Denver police confirmed that the local JTTF has been collecting information about peaceful protest activities that have nothing to do with terrorism or any other criminal activity. News of the classified bulletin also comes on the heels of an ACLU lawsuit against the Secret Service for the continuing practice of allowing pro-Bush protesters to remain visible to cameras during presidential appearances, and corralling anti-Bush protesters into pens or designated areas far from the media.

The last paragraph is especially troubling because the Bush Administration is, in effect, promoting the free speech that they agree with and is advantageous to their reelection campaign, and attempting to sideline the free speech that is harmful to the administration.

___________________
http://www.discoboomer.com/forums/

quote:

Originally posted by Konijn Island this sort of brutality has become all too common... the fact that these sort of protesters are forcibly shepherded into "designated free speech" areas is as disturbing as it is inconguent with the tenets of an open and democratic society...

The thing is, when they are not shepherded into these areas violence errupts. That is why the police are there getting over prepared and being overly sensitive to protesters. They either get blamed when violence erupts and people get hurt, or that they obstructed peoples right to free speech.

It seems to me to be a damned if ya do damned if ya don't situation. Free speech is not throwing milk on police officers.

I was trying to think of a sexually explicit joke to make about that milk on the police guy...but failed, miserably.

quote:

Originally posted by Boomer187 It seems to me to be a damned if ya do damned if ya don't situation. Free speech is not throwing milk on police officers.

I certainly agree with you there, and those who come just to break windows, spraypaint local businesses etc should be arrested.

I guess Liquid X or someone from Miami can give us the best details of what went on there.

___________________
http://www.discoboomer.com/forums/

sickening, and typical of the riot squads to do things like this to protesters.

quote:

Originally posted by djSlain "we didn't do anything to provoke the cops" = Throwing rocks, bottles, other things. Verbal Abuse. Threatening police. Exposing ur ass to the cops.

protesters and activists do many of these things as a form of retaliation to pigs because pigs are often just as brutal (or worse). throwing a brick into a window or spray painting a wall isnt as bad as oh... i dunno... shooting a peaceful protester twice in the chest and then running him over with an suv maybe? (read up on the carlos guiliani incident in itally a couple years ago). theyre just fighting fire with fire.

___________________

[ Romans Chapter 1, Verse 6: And you are included among those Gentiles who have been called to belong to Jesus Christ. ]