The W
Views: 97813997
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
30.7.14 1219
The W - Current Events & Politics - If this doesn't piss you off, you're beyond hope. (Page 3)
This thread has 17 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: Prev 1 2 3(2470 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (51 total)
eviljonhunt81
Pepperoni








Since: 6.1.02
From: not Japan

Since last post: 2902 days
Last activity: 2899 days
#41 Posted on
The term Democracy has referred to a Constitutional Republic for the past 200 years.

How democratic were the founders in Greece? Only land owning Greek males were involved in the Senate. A "true" democracy has never been practiced on a wide scale, and nobody uses the term to mean a complete and true Democracy any more.

(edited by eviljonhunt81 on 8.9.02 0401)


ELECTRIC BLOOD - The Monkey That Will Rule the World
Jersey Is Dead - Feel my Grief

Weekly Visitor
kazhayashi81
Potato korv








Since: 17.6.02
From: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Since last post: 2617 days
Last activity: 2567 days
AIM:  
#42 Posted on

    Originally posted by eviljonhunt81
    The term Democracy has referred to a Constitutional Republic for the past 200 years.

    .

    (edited by eviljonhunt81 on 8.9.02 0401)



Is that why, until the 30s and FDR, democracy was a political term army recruits had to learn and it was described as mob rule that lead to the loss of personal property?










"You can save the planet, I'll save your seat"- Uncle Kracker, Better Days
"Confucious say: Man with hand in pocket feel cocky all day!"- Crank Yankers
eviljonhunt81
Pepperoni








Since: 6.1.02
From: not Japan

Since last post: 2902 days
Last activity: 2899 days
#43 Posted on
I was referring to its use in political theory and academic circles. Democracy = Constitutional Republic.



ELECTRIC BLOOD - The Monkey That Will Rule the World
Jersey Is Dead - Feel my Grief

Weekly Visitor
Gavintzu
Summer sausage








Since: 2.1.02
From: Calgary ... Alberta Canada

Since last post: 2781 days
Last activity: 2781 days
#44 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
No no no no no. Let's not get sidetracked by historical squabbles.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances"

Let's talk about this. This is the key point.

This group of citizens had intended to assemble in a public place to petition the government for a redress of grievances, but they were herded off to a less "inconvenient" place. Then, under the pretense of preventing the heinous act of freaking graffiti, the Pigs waddled in and broke some heads. This happens all the time, all over the West. And it's nothing new.

Do the streets of America belong to the government or the citizens? Why are so many people apparently willing to just hand over their hard-won freedoms all of a sudden? Would we see the same response in this forum if this was an NRA protest getting gassed? (Just a hypothetical example, of course).






Jenny, Jenny, you're the girl for me;
You don't know me, but you make me so happy.
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1184 days
Last activity: 981 days
#45 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
Before I get too into this, yes we live in a Constitutional Republic. Democracy has been used by people too lazy to be correct, especially in the last 75 or so years when the phrase "Republic" went out of style.


Anyhoo.


    Originally posted by Gavintzu
    >"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances"

    Let's talk about this. This is the key point.

    This group of citizens had intended to assemble in a public place to petition the government for a redress of grievances, but they were herded off to a less "inconvenient" place. Then, under the pretense of preventing the heinous act of freaking graffiti, the Pigs waddled in and broke some heads.



I don't know if you got the memo, but vandalism is a crime.


    Originally posted by Gavintzu
    This happens all the time, all over the West. And it's nothing new.

    Do the streets of America belong to the government or the citizens? Why are so many people apparently willing to just hand over their hard-won freedoms all of a sudden?



That's quite a jump isn't it. Of course, a lot of liberals are perfectly willing to hand over their freedom to own guns, so what's really new.


    Originally posted by Gavintzu
    Would we see the same response in this forum if this was an NRA protest getting gassed? (Just a hypothetical example, of course).





Hey if they are running amok through the streets committing crimes and destroying personal property, then yeah they would've gotten what was coming to them.
ekedolphin
Scrapple








Since: 12.1.02
From: Indianapolis, IN; now residing in Suffolk, VA

Since last post: 41 days
Last activity: 5 days
#46 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.52
The Constitution does guarantee “the right of the people peaceably to assemble”. But when they're jostling and threatening Republican donors, challenging police authority and vandalizing other people's personal property, it's no longer a peaceful assembly. Large groups of people are only as civilized as the most uncivilized person in that group. If the demonstration gets out of hand, the police should do whatever is necessary to quell the riot with the highest regard for the preservation of life.

No one was killed in the riot, so it could have been much worse than it was. The President and the people he was speaking to were apparently in very real danger, hence the need for the demonstration of force by the police.

The article by Jeff Crook was crystal-clear propaganda, and I'm disappointed that someone actually fell for that. “It burns, Daddy, what did I do wrong? Please make it stop”? A personal appeal to parents of young children-- once again, an effective form of propaganda. The picture of Dubya smiling as the WTC burned in the background? I'm no fan of Bush (in fact, I'm a Democrat), but I don't think any American citizen was pleased by the Sept. 11 tragedies. Portraying the American President as an uncaring bastard who's more than happy to use the WTC attack to help bolster his political career? Again-- another form of propaganda.

Judging by the preparation for this act of civil disobedience, it was clear that the organizers of this protest expected violence to erupt. Yet someone still brings their children to a protest, seeing this as a perfect opportunity to have a nice, quiet family outing? Completely irresponsible behavior on the part of the parents-- assuming that's even who they are. We never saw a photograph of the baby being sprayed by pepper gas, of course; nor an identification of who the person holding the child was. All we saw was a baby crying, something that babies are apt to do even under ideal circumstances.

Besides, even if the baby had been sprayed, it's not as if someone intentionally aimed the spray at the baby to begin with. And I doubt very much the story about the policemen laughing their ass off while seeing the child in pain. Someone would have to be a truly evil bastard to do that, and I don't see any evidence that that's true. All I see is a potentially dangerous mob (that already had violence on their minds) defying police authority and threatening people's lives.



“I can't believe it! I just got pinned by a freaking 12-year-old!”--
Kurt Angle talking about Rey Mysterio on WWE SmackDown!, 8/9/02

Two-Time, Two-Time Randomly Selected Weiner of the Day, 5/27/02 and 7/3/02

Gavintzu
Summer sausage








Since: 2.1.02
From: Calgary ... Alberta Canada

Since last post: 2781 days
Last activity: 2781 days
#47 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00

ekedolphin sez:

    ... when they're jostling and threatening Republican donors, challenging police authority and vandalizing other people's personal property, it's no longer a peaceful assembly. Large groups of people are only as civilized as the most uncivilized person in that group.

I can guarantee you that the latest Ozzfest will have more criminal acts (vandalism, fighting, public drunkeness, possession and use of controlled substances) than that street demonstration. Do you see body-armour wearing riot cops wading into the mosh pits?

At protests outside abortion clinics there is jostling and threats. Do we see fully-equipped riot police waving truncheons and firing tear gas there, or do we see regular cops keeping the peace?

Here's a thought -- that "riot" was inevitable once the riot police showed up. Think about it. During the LA riots did the riot police show up before anyone started rioting? Of course not ... they appeared only after the rioting started. How could they predict rioting that day?

If you take a police officer, give him body armour, a rubber truncheon, pepper spray, a water hose, and the anonymity of a full-face shield, and tell him to keep the peace at a demonstration, you are really sending him a not too subtle message:

Heads Shall Be Broken Today.

If anyone is at a peaceful rally or demonstration and you see a line of regular cops, you should feel glad. Help is close by if you need it. But if you are at a peaceful rally or demonstration and you see a line of riot police, you had better start planning an escape route. Those police are a very accurate sign that a riot is going to start.

One last thing: by defending the actions of the police in this case, people are helping to establish a precident that this is how demonstrators should be dealt with. But none of us can fully know the future. As Moe pointed out, it is through street demonstrations that political inertia is overcome. They led in the past to women's rights, minority rights, worker's rights, the end of wars ... that is why those in power fear them so much.

Who's to say in the next few years you or one of your loved ones may feel obliged to take to the streets? It is your right to. But if we allow the police to manhandle this group of protesters, those in the future most certainly won't be handled any differently.






Jenny, Jenny, you're the girl for me;
You don't know me, but you make me so happy.
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1184 days
Last activity: 981 days
#48 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29

    Originally posted by Gavintzu

    I can guarantee you that the latest Ozzfest will have more criminal acts (vandalism, fighting, public drunkeness, possession and use of controlled substances) than that street demonstration. Do you see body-armour wearing riot cops wading into the mosh pits?

    At protests outside abortion clinics there is jostling and threats. Do we see fully-equipped riot police waving truncheons and firing tear gas there, or do we see regular cops keeping the peace?



Maybe there should be. It'll get that annoying smell of weed out of the air.


    Originally posted by Gavintzu


    Here's a thought -- that "riot" was inevitable once the riot police showed up. Think about it. During the LA riots did the riot police show up before anyone started rioting? Of course not ... they appeared only after the rioting started. How could they predict rioting that day?

    If you take a police officer, give him body armour, a rubber truncheon, pepper spray, a water hose, and the anonymity of a full-face shield, and tell him to keep the peace at a demonstration, you are really sending him a not too subtle message:

    Heads Shall Be Broken Today.




It took me a while to be able to type this after laughing so hard. You know the riot police are usually only needed during a riot.



    Originally posted by Gavintzu
    If anyone is at a peaceful rally or demonstration and you see a line of regular cops, you should feel glad. Help is close by if you need it. But if you are at a peaceful rally or demonstration and you see a line of riot police, you had better start planning an escape route. Those police are a very accurate sign that a riot is going to start.


This is great stuff.


    Originally posted by Gavintzu
    <

    One last thing: by defending the actions of the police in this case, people are helping to establish a precident that this is how demonstrators should be dealt with. But none of us can fully know the future. As Moe pointed out, it is through street demonstrations that political inertia is overcome. They led in the past to women's rights, minority rights, worker's rights, the end of wars ... that is why those in power fear them so much.

    Who's to say in the next few years you or one of your loved ones may feel obliged to take to the streets? It is your right to. But if we allow the police to manhandle this group of protesters, those in the future most certainly won't be handled any differently.





Yeah. And we'd probably be bright enough NOT TO CAUSE A FREAKING RIOT IN THE PROCESS BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO GET OUR HEADS BASHED IN.
MoeGates
Andouille








Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 6 days
Last activity: 2 days
#49 Posted on
Please re-read both the original article and the A.P. report also posted. For some reason, the conventional wisdom on this board is that we are talking about a demonstration with graffiti, looting, rioting, property destruction, and violence. In fact, this is not what happened. The justification for using force seems to be "well, a riot could have happened." Then that evolved into a riot was probably going to happen. Then into "a riot was happening." This is how those rumors like those about Eric Bischoff and Vince Russon returning to the WWE happen... oh wait.



Expressing myself EVERY day - but especially on July 22, 2002!
BoromirMark
Potato korv








Since: 8.5.02
From: Milan-Ann Arbor, MI

Since last post: 187 days
Last activity: 187 days
AIM:  
#50 Posted on
Nope, didn't piss me off.

No, wait, check that, crying baby liberals whining about police doing their fuggin job pisses me off, yes.
Jaguar
Knackwurst








Since: 23.1.02
From: Phoenix, AZ

Since last post: 114 days
Last activity: 114 days
#51 Posted on
I don't see how this was their job. The AP wire didn't seem to show that anybody was threatening physical violence. They didn't report a riot. They reported people confronting police at the barricades, and at some unreported time for some unreported reason the police were ordered to disperse the crowds by force. Why were these orders given? What was the reasoning behind it? That's what I would like to know. I've been to protests and been surounded by both armed military (Ft. Benning, School of the Americas protest) and by police in riot gear (Washington D.C. anti-war protest) and the police have never felt the need to break up these protests. As a matter of fact, a group of about 30-40 black clad 'anarchists' showed up at the DC protest and began burning flags. Did the police start busting heads and spraying tear gas? No, they simply marched over to the flag burners and I assume ordered them to disperse. And this was a protest that got smeared all over the media, and the police probably would've been cheered had they broken it up with violence. But did they? No.

So the real question is: Why did they feel the need to become violent in Oregon?

-Jag

Oh yeah Grimis. The Riot Police do show up when things are still peaceful. After Seattle, some people consider it prudent. Especially considering the fact that the anti-war protest was originaly another anti-WTO protest. Of course, I'm sure if the police HAD started busting heads, 20,000 protesters fleeing the beatings would've certainly *looked* like a riot.



"You gotta hate somebody before this is over. Them, me, it doesn't matter."

"Hate, who do I hate? You tell me."

"Who do you love?"

-Wintermute to Case in William Gibson's Neuromancer
Pages: Prev 1 2 3
Pages: Prev 1 2 3Thread ahead: My own 911 Tribute Column
Next thread: Nationalism
Previous thread: Okay, if THIS doesn't piss you off...
(2470 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Except that most papers serve Podunk USA. My wife has worked for/been affiliated with several papers and they all inflated the numbers.
The W - Current Events & Politics - If this doesn't piss you off, you're beyond hope. (Page 3)Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.124 seconds.