Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
what on earth makes you, jorgelito, or anyone else assume that these anarchists you wave about in the direction of without having bothered to check anything out about who they might be, were just "bent on causing trouble"? where the fuck does that comes from?
this is what "free speech zones" are also about: confining the area of police violence to a distant sector, away from the cameras, so that when information starts to surface about that violence, the police are in an advantageous public relations position. must work: folk in this thread have swallowed their memes.
you can get other information from any indymedia site. this information comes with it's own problems, but one thing is sure: if you look AT ALL and ANYTHING the idea that "those anarchists" were "just causing trouble" goes out the fucking window.
and even if it didn't, what is being justified is the suppression of political action.
|
Roach, there are different sets of protesters. Some are peaceful and there are others that incite violence. The problem occurs when they comingle. The violent protesters actually disrupt the peaceful ones as well which is why they were grateful to the police when they removed them. It is unfortunate if peaceful protesters get caught up in violence and are treated roughly by police. That is unfortunate, it's actually happened to me. No one is suggesting (at least I'm not) that political speech should be suppressed. The issue that's being addressed is incitement of violence. I know if I am protesting, I would be very angry if hooligans were there too to incite violence. It damages and ruins the protest. If anything, the violent protesters are the ones suppressing others' rights political speech and protest.
__________________
"The race is not always to the swift, nor battle to the strong, but
to the one that endures to the end."
"Demand more from yourself, more than anyone else could ever ask!"
- My recruiter
|