QUOTE: "Calling all lefties:
The Army has brought their "surge" to the city of Tacoma. Last night, protests at the Port of Tacoma brought together overy fifty people and, as of this writing, four individuals have been arrested.
The story has been reported on King 5, KIRO 7, in the Tacoma News Tribune, the Olympian, and even in the New York Times.
Please come to Tacoma and join the fight. Learn all about it at my site, The Tahoma Activist, and at the Tacoma Chapter of the Students for a Democratic Society.
Stay connected to this struggle, and tell everyone you know. Bush has brought his war to Tacoma, and we're gonna make him wish he never had."
After reading this and all of the other reports of police firing on hopeless civilians, I was absolutely outraged!
Actually, I do in fact have testicles, and I don't believe what other people say without looking into it myself. So after looking at some other videos of these so called, "Peaceful Protests".
In this video you can clearly see that protesters are clearly disobeying police orders by sitting down instead of moving back.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfhUaUuG1sM
This video shows protesters shoving into police while they are yelling, "NON-VIOLENT"
In this video you can see that protesters had cut through barricade lines and crossed past where they were allowed.
http://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=9hIIuJK_Uh8&mode=related&search=
In that video you can also so protesters actively finding the canisters and throwing them BACK at the police. Not to mention most of the barricades had been knocked over.
Here you can see a man who clearly needs to shave that is harassing a police officer..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulJiyZN87CA
The only intelligent protester all week has been:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qy03oiVDS1o
ID:28410
 Mar 15 2007, 10:17 am
|
|
You're confused. The people who show up at a protest prepared to do what they're told are the ones on the other side of the barricade.
"Disperse!" "Okay." isn't a protest by any definition of the word. Granted, it's stupid to throw stuff back at the police... that's an invitation to escalation... but... at the same time, that's how the Boston Massacre, which lit the spark that grew into the American Revolution, started. Good thing? Bad thing? Who knows. I just think it's a shame that a country that was founded on the idea that treason against an unjust rule isn't only necessary but moral is now being controlled by people who want us to think merely questioning our government is unpatriotic, to say nothing of a little shoving. :P | |
I never said that the police forced them to disperse. But when a crowd starts moving towards you it's normally much safer to just back up then sit down and refuse to obey them. Also the police were warned to be ready to be attacked by protesters as had happened earlier in the week. There was a line of police officers and 4-5 protesters started shoving through the police line, to the point where one of them started fighting a police officer. The police started firing off rubber bullets like they should have, and the conflict was quickly resolved.
These people are crazy to think that 50 people protesting war shipments is going to end a war, and fighting with police is not exactly a good idea either. I don't have a problem with you questioning the fact that the USA is at war, I also don't have a problem with you saying anything bad about the government unless you are completely lying. But for protesters to take it out on police who have NOTHING to do with federal troops is just outrageous. I do believe that the majority of the protesters that were there, were there with no intent to harm anyone. But three or four bad apples can turn a whole protest violent. It was a horrible idea for them to throw the tear gas cannisters back at the police, and not only did it effect the police, it gassed the peaceful people who were just sitting there. Also the incredibly aggressive women in the front was obviously looking for a conflict for shouting in the polices faces and then waving signs in there faces. | |
Ugh, all I have to say is it's a pathetic display of how little progression we've made in western civilization. I mean, It looked extremely familiar to protesters in the middle east(and Pakistan too i guess). The only thing missing was some flag burning, and rock throwing(I guess the canister throwing makes up for this). I'm honestly sickened to see this. Where's SilkWizard to save the day when you need him? In Las Vegas, getting drunk off his feet. Our only hope is that they shoot one of the hippies, and kill them(one of the less peaceful ones of course). I know this is a rant, but oh well, it ticks me off that instead of combating a far more important issue(like gang violence), the taxpayers dollars are wasted on a bunch of careless hippies!
| |
Oh, I should point out that I'm a flaming liberal. I support social rights. I think the war in Iraq is the last thing the world needed, and I can look at Iraq on a map, point at it, and say "I told you so" -- it helps me sleep at night and makes me feel really good about myself during the daytime, because I was right and They were wrong.
So if Canada were to start a war (hang on for a minute while I stop laughing) and someone were to start a protest on public property about the war, it'd still be my job to ensure that no one got out of line, even if I agreed with them. I'd bet that at least two-thirds of those cops there are also Democrats, and couldn't stand George W. or the Iraq war. After all, it's Washington State, which is bluer than the lochs of Scotland (which are actually rather grey most of the time, but stop diminishing my point, you jerk ;-)). So when those people are throwing debris at the officers and returning tear gas, they should take pause and really think about who exactly they're lashing out against. Not an enemy, not a faceless military arm of the government, but other people who believe the same things they do, but who also have a duty to those people to protect them from themselves before anyone gets seriously hurt. | |
So I guess I'm alone in saying I'd rather see a demonstration get wildly out of hand than see one that's afraid to.
Don't get me wrong... I'm sure the people doing the shouting and throwing were the sort of idiots who really DON'T distinguish between police and soldiers, or soldiers and storm troopers (and if A == B and B == C...).. but their actions shouldn't be used as a reason to condemn the demonstration as a whole or to place limits on future ones. It's sad that the police are in the middle of the people they're sworn to protect and the government those people are protesting... but... if every time that innocent men and women in police uniform got up in a line, protesters felt compelled to become orderly and well-behaved... then we'd never get anything done. :P Blame those who've created the situation that puts folks in any color of uniform in harm's way. And I should point out that I donate money to help buy the police body armor, because by and large, my philosophy is that the safer they are, the safer everybody is... but... liberty trumps security, or it's supposed to. The risks of living in a free society are preferable to the constraints of living in a safe one. Meanwhile, what am I doing? Absolutely nothing. I don't think the demonstrations like that accomplish anything, I don't think it's the way to go. But I'm not in charge of what the protesters think, and wouldn't care to be. :P | |
Hedgemistress, I don't have a problem with protesters or what they decide todo with there free time whether it be get arrested or peacefully protest. But when people go around saying that the Tacoma police officers fired upon "Innocent" civilians who were just sitting there makes me kind of outraged. Blatant lying to try to prove a point should always be looked at shamefully. In fact when children lie when they're children they should just get smacked across the face that would make the world a better place.
Back to subject, people who lie to prove there point should just die. Saying that we are in an illegal war. Also, when people just stand there yelling at officers like they've broken some huge ass law. Do you think that if the officers needed there badge numbers displayed they would? I find it kind of hard to believe that every single officer doesn't know the law. Yelling things at officers is even worse. Do you think that officers are actually responsible for any of the war in Iraq? It is there job and duty to protect and uphold the law, if protesters are getting violent they have the right to stop the protesters. Most of that isn't to argue with anyone. | |
The officers didn't have their badge numbers visible? (I didn't watch the videos... my point doesn't depend on their content.)
Why not? ARE they storm troopers? | |
It is probably a city ordinance, also the police officers were told not to say anything at all. So if the numbers were not visible, and they are not allowed to talk...
| |
That's inexcusable! I submit to you that a police officer who is not identifiable to the public is not accountable to the public. a police officer who is not accountable to the public does not serve the public. A police officer who doed not serve the public is not a police officer.
In Washington state of all places... sight of the WTO talks where riot police trucked in from every major city fired riot rounds at citizens heads, used gas can launchers like rocket launchers (i.e., aimed the CANISTERS at people like they were projectiles), confiscated protesters signs and t-shirts BEFORE protest activities even started, chased down women in high heels and fancy evening wear... obviously not protesters... opened a can of mace and emptied it directly onto a man's genitals... The blame was placed on "lack of training." Anybody who needs special training to be told "don't empty an entire canister of mace down somebody's pants" shouldn't be given body armor and weaponry. The real culprit was anonymity... Abu Ghraib, the internet, and clinical experiments have all shown that when a person is granted anonymity, it becomes easier for them to commit acts that fall far outside their normal standards of decency. You get enough people in masks and body armor and give no way for them to individually be held accountable for their actions... somebody's going to get a can of mace down their pants. It's an inevitability of human nature. I guess law enforcement in WA didn't learn anything, though. If those cops were following some regulation, their highest duty should have been to break it. | |
chased down women in high heels and fancy evening wear... obviously not protesters... opened a can of mace and emptied it directly onto a man's genitals... Proof please. The blame was placed on "lack of training." Anybody who needs special training to be told "don't empty an entire canister of mace down somebody's pants" shouldn't be given body armor and weaponry. The real culprit was anonymity... Abu Ghraib, the internet, and clinical experiments have all shown that when a person is granted anonymity, it becomes easier for them to commit acts that fall far outside their normal standards of decency. You get enough people in masks and body armor and give no way for them to individually be held accountable for their actions... somebody's going to get a can of mace down their pants. It's an inevitability of human nature. Proof please | |
I'm with Hedgemistress on this one. If they weren't showing their badges, they weren't acting as police officers but as an armed body of civilians, which is several dozen shades of hypocritical on their behalf.
It's one thing to protect your property from rioters, but another thing to place protesters under arrest when you aren't operating in a clearly official capacity. On the other hand, I don't think an officer needs to submit his badge number on the spot to a perpetrator he's arresting, as long as the officer eventually does give the information to the perp. | |
Proof? Of the Battle in Seattle? No idea how old you are, but if you had watched the news in 1999 the way you apparently do now, you wouldn't be asking for proof. :P It's still possible to find a lot of stuff on the web... a quick search for "WTO tear gas" on the Seattle Post-Intelligencer's website will find -all kinds- of stuff, especially as the last major lawsuit from the incident apparently just settled like, this January. It's hard to sort through and find the stuff relating to the original incident, as there were smaller anniversry protests in 2000 and 2001... but they're there.
Jump to the further back pages to get articles from the time period. The first several are about the latest lawsuits, which basicallty deal with the Constitutionality of mass arrests... which is another, equally important side of the issue, but not one of total relevance. The most charming incidents that were caught on videotape (pity there was no YouTube back then, huh?) include: a couple of art students with a video camera sitting in a parked car who, upon obligingly rolling down their window in response to a police request, had their car filled with pepper spray... a man backing away from an officer with his hands up in a gesture of surrender being hit with a bean bag round at point blank and kicked in the groin... a woman wearing a first aid volunteer armband, already down on her knees from the effects of gassing, being kicked over and manhandled by a pair of riot cops... This is what got caught on camera. Protesters having their signs confiscated, non-protesters being gassed and arrested for being in the "limited curfew" (i.e., forbidden) zone... which aside from being 50 blocks wide, wasn't publicized... is all mentioned in the articles on the lawsuits. I'm disappointed that I can't find any reference to the man who got his genitals sprayed, but when you search for mentions of an incident involving "genitals" that happened 8 years ago... you get all kinds of unrelated stuff. Anyway, in a protest involving 50,000 people, there were some violent protesters along with the non violent, and some practitioners of "civil disobedience" (which is still non-violent!) along with the law-abiding ones... but the police response was to treat everybody the same. At the time, there was no regulation in Seattle requiring police to have their ID clearly displayed (though I think the lack of such a rule is only because well-meaning individuals never consider that an officer would hide such information), but in its aftermath, the City Council passed a new rule requiring such. And I agree with Jtgibson about officers not necessarily needing to stop mid-action to give information to perps. The courts generally agree that even the famous "Miranda righs" can wait, if it's a matter of public or police safety. | |
Hedgemistress, The topic at hand is Tacoma, and not whatever you seem to be talking about. I have never said police brutality has never happened, it will happen all the time. But saying that police brutality is always at fault when protests turn violent is just outrageous.
| |
Once again, you are confused... this time about which of us has no idea what topic is being discussed:
"But saying that police brutality is always at fault when protests turn violent is just outrageous." You're right! You're also incredibly irrelevant, as nobody made that claim! As for what I'm talking about: Tacoma is in Washington State. Washington State was the sight of the WTO protests eight years ago. I mentioned the protests as a reason that police in Washington State should have known better than to not provide visible identification. You asked for proof of my claims regarding the WTO protests. I furnished it. You, having no real response, responded with: "Hedgemistress, The topic at hand is Tacoma, and not whatever you seem to be talking about." and proceeded to pretend that the point I was trying to make was that past incidents of police brutality proves that a protest turning violent is always the police's fault. Are we all on the same page now? | |
Protests are perfectly legal if you stick to the mutually-agreed-upon area and do not destroy property. Police aren't there to prevent people from protesting, they're there to ensure that people stay in the area -- if they leave the protest area, they're either conducting business or going home, or else they're going to be sent on their way or put in jail for disrupting the peace. If they're in the protest area, police don't touch 'em because they have no reason to. It's a demonstration.
Armed rebellion is dead in the West. A civil war these days would be bloodier than anything the world has ever seen.