dksuddeth

Is this all we're good for now?

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/09/12/usa....ap/index.html

Sure glad I live in a country where I don't have to fear the government.

__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

Ustwo

Yea this struck me as odd too.

No matter what the effect is, the left will whine about it and our enemies will lie about it if its used outside of the US, so I can see why 'proving' its safe by using it here first could be logical, it won't matter anyways. Would be fun at the next WTO meeting though, 1000's of ill hippies.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Leto

Now THIS would make good television.....

why do people automatically state that the left 'whines' and that the right 'rants'???

just one of those things that makes one go 'hmmmm'...

Jinn

Because conservatives hate hippies more than they hate ultra-conservatives? I didn't even get a hmm out of it.

__________________
"I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel

Bill O'Rights

OK...so far, I'll I've gotten out of this, from the first three posts, is that the left "whines" and that the right "rants". I think that topic has been pretty well covered in any number of political threads.

What say we stick to the actual topic at hand? For once?

__________________
"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." - Susan B. Anthony

"Hedonism with rules isn't hedonism at all, it's the Republican party." - JumpinJesus

It is indisputable that true beauty lies within...but a nice rack sure doesn't hurt.

stevo

I don't think there's anything wrong with it. I'll admit when I saw drudge's headline this morning: "Air Force Chief: Test Weapons on Americans" It got my attention and I though of saddam and the kurds. But after reading the article I don't see any reason why we can't use non-lethal crowd control measures on the public if the need arises. No one is saying go ahead and make the american public a bunch a guinea pigs, but to not be afraid to use it if there's an appropriate situation.

Hell, its better than my plan to deal with the terrorist sympathizers and anarchist wannabe's.

__________________
"If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser

roachboy

let's see if more can be done to right the thread after its initial contact with the ustwo effect.

1. i find all militarizations of police functions to be alarming.
in general, they seem to me little more than an aspect of the self-defeating markets-are-rational policies of the right--you increase social stratification, you increase class conflict--the response from within the upside world of the right is the legitimation of increased violence in internal repression and the militarization of the police--starting with the "los angeles" model (which is itself an adaptation of the french crs model of organizing police)---is of a piece with this.

for the right, increased state violence and a radical expansion of the prison system are, intentionally or not, a way of administering the social consequences of their own economic policies.

the moralizing discourse of crime is also of a piece with this: you attribute crime to some moral defect endured by the poor and that functions to frame state repression as a rational response of the "good people" faced with a rising tide of "bad people"--and in that, the linkages--which are self-evident--between economic policies and class conflict are disguised.

more generally: a defining feature of the modern state is, in max weber's terms, a monopoly on "legitimate violence"---a modern state run by extreme rightwing militants would maintain its monopoly on legitimate violence as well, but they would direct that violence in ways that were aesthetically pleasing to themselves---so they could pretend that their control reduced violence---but the opposite would be more likely.

so i am glad, stevo, that you have no power.



as for testing out no lethal weapons on the population--well, there have been bleeds from various psyop tactics developed by the military and the suppression of public dissent in the states for some time. all the article in the op seems to indicate is a new and improve type of bleed. if this stream of weapons system migration becomes operational, you'll probably see its effects in the acceleration of the delegitimation of the state--a process that the bushpeople have shown a certain virtuosity in extending---and it will play into a dynamic of still more increased state violence.

you would think this dynamic stupid. but if you look at the debacle of the iraq war and its relationship to...um...not having a fucking strategy, you will be able to conclude for yourself that stupidity is no obstacle for the application of state violence conservative-style.

so this could turn out to be really not good.
but not for the reasons you imagine, dk.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

stevo

Everyone should be glad I have no power.

The militarization of the police (the increase in SWAT raids, specifically) is disturbing to me as well. But I don't see this related to that. I just see it as another tool law enforcers can use for crowd control. I'm not saying to go out and use it on a protest, or even some mild voilence like the WTO protests, with smashed starbucks and mcdonalds windows, but if riots like 1992 ever happen again, it would be good if the cops had a way to immobilize the rioters without killing them. I think. I think the AF secretary has a point, although its moot. No matter what weapons we use, whether they're used against US citizens or not, we'll still get flack for it from the AIs and IRCs.

__________________
"If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser

Leto

but i did.

And yes, the topic: like I said good television. Everybody will want to see this. It's as much a spectacle as a car chase, or YouTube fare. Bread and Circuses are a good people management.

highthief

That would entail wholesale bannings!

At any rate, sure, why not test it domestically. No use having it fail in battle when the chips are really down. Quell a few prison riots, bust up a few gang fights ...

__________________
Si vis pacem parabellum.

pan6467

Soooooo when people start suing for the use of non-neccesary use of force, or these weapons turn out to be non-lethel but debilitating, are you supporters going to start bitching when people sue the government (and rightfully so) for billions of our tax dollars? Because if they were to ever use it on me or a loved one.... I'd sue.

It truly scares me that there are people in this country willing to use weapons meant for war on our own people. Gotta love the people that as long as they are being told they are getting tax cuts they'll support whatever the President and our government does.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

stevo

Thats quite an assumption, pan. Tax cuts have nothing to do with this.

__________________
"If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser

Rekna

How does a thread like this turn into right vs left?

roachboy

it's pretty obvious why that would be the case, dont you think?
first, the op comes from a particular political position.
after the usual ustwo effect was nuetralized, you find a conversation that seems to me to be geared around two basic questions:

1. the general linkage between increased class polarization and the transformation of state violence.

2. the conservative fear of public dissent.

stevo, for example, appears to be resistant to the notion that there is a distinction between public protest and anarchy--he seems to assume that all public protest is in itself anarchy--the reasons for this are not clear, but from the posts above, it seems that the lynchpin that functions of many that does not function for him (what would enable the distinction to be made between public protest and anarchy) is that he does not approve, for whatever reason, of who he imagines the protestors to be and "proves" the point by resorting to tedious stereotypes.

that seems to me to be the thread in a nutshell so far.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

stevo

I think i only mentioned anarchist wannabes because they turn up at every protest (except those pro-life ones). Just like the communist party members, hippies, and feminists. All are not one and one is not all, but take a random sample of a left wing protest, and these are some of the people you would get.

I don't think a public protest and anarchy are the same thing. You'd have to be quite a fool to think something like that.

__________________
"If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser

pan6467

Didn't answer the first question there Stevo.

Personally, I want to believe it is for the tax cuts that people are allowing this president/administration to run (not walk) all over the people. For if it is that people just believe we need to turn weapons made for war on our own people..... then we have serious problems in this nation and a future that I cannot see freedom fitting into.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

roachboy

just reacting to what you wrote, stevo.

i am in complete agreement with you on this point.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

stevo

I guess it depends on who the weapons were used against. If it was rioters burning buildings, torching cars, assaulting random people, firemen, and paramedics. Then whatever force used against them is appropriate and they don't have any right to sue anyone. If you or a loved one was involved in a full scale riot and they used a non-leathal corwd control measure on you, then you'd have no right to do anything except remain silent and get an attorney.

But if it was used against some people at a peaceful rally, well then of course they'd have the right to sue.

__________________
"If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser

pan6467

Who would decide when and what groups to use these weapons on?

And what of the innocent passersby and the people supposedly being protested against, are they to become victims of our government's zealousness to control the population?

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Mojo_PeiPei

I'm not to big on the idea of testing on American citizens. How do they usually test these types of weapons? I think testing them on the enemies first is a great idea, Abu Gharib, Gitmo, hell maybe even on American prisoners, but not citizens, that is retarded. Maybe give a few toys to foreign governments who have stringent policies against demonstrations, let them test it as a means of crowd control, have American observers there.

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

stevo

The police chief, governor, etc. Who do you think would have that decision making ability? the new rookie?

I don't think anyone has advocated using this against peaceful assembly. I think if the situation warrented, there would be very very few "innocent bystandards" around.

Maybe I'm mistaken, but I don't think the AF secretary was talking of testing the weapons on us citizens. I think he was talking about using them here first. I got the impression it was for setting an example - that the weapons are safe enough to use on our own people, they're safe enough to use on a group of insurgents. I would hope they would be tested prior to being used in a crowd control situation.

__________________
"If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser

pan6467

So you're talking about a Waco type use, or a Ruby Ridge?

I see.

Again who is to determine this and under what guidelines?

And what happens if ...... oops there was an accident and we take out innocent bystanders?

Even prison riots have innocent bystanders, not all prisoners take part in the riots.

Another scary part is, how we have gotten to a point where we have generals more worried about what the international press writes about them?

We need to test them here at home so if they aren't as safe as we say, it's ok. We killed 200 of our own citizens.... we'll change the weapons before we use them in war against another country (and we'll keep testing them here at home first). Sucks to be those 200 US citizens and their families though.

WTF is that mentality about?

You truly want to test them.... test them against ILLEGALS coming across our borders.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

highthief

I'm not in your country. I'd sooner you test it on yourselves first than test it on me and mine.

Silly Amerikan ...

__________________
Si vis pacem parabellum.

stevo

try thinking about what i write before your emotions take over. sheesh.

__________________
"If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser

Ustwo

The main reason this becomes a left-right issue is that when is the last time you saw a violence at a right wing protest? When is the last time you saw a right wing protest? The closest would be an anti-abortion rally which doesn't seem to draw the numbers or the violence to warrant testing crowd control weapons.

The left will whine because they will be the target as their protests tend to have the destructive nature that non-lethal force was designed for. You can argue its only the anarchists or the communists from answer or whatever, but regardless of who, its when that would matter.

I can understand the gun-shy nature of the military. Just look at all the bullshit out there about depleted uranium, so if we were using some unknown weapon that made you shit your pants or whatever, the claims would be everything from birth defects to mind control, and the unscientific press wouldn't question it from their sources much like we see in the mideast.

Now I don't think that should MATTER, I could care less what false claims are made, but I can understand the concept even if I don't agree with it.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Willravel

I've seen the data on microwave based weaponry, and it isn't safe to anyone at any time. It can cause cancer even after one use and if there is any malfunction of the weapon it can litterally boil your inner liquids - everything from blood to bile to stomach acid - instantly. When a bean bag gun misfires, all you get are some beans.

As for testing weaponry on crowds....well I've been hit with tear gas and bean bag projectiles. Both times, I was involved in a legal protest and not one member of the protest had made offensive actions towards law enforcement officials or anyone else, for that matter. Cops get anxious. It's a fact. Sometimes people get the pepper spray for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. I'd be pretty pissed if my 78 year old grandmother was shot with a microwave weapon because she happened to be shopping at the same time there was a strike or something.

dc_dux

Whats the big surprise?

Congress had hearing several years ago on a DoD program in the 60s and 70s - Project 112 - that tested toxins and biological agents on miliary personnel, with a spill-over exposure on civilians.

http://www.usmedicine.com/article.cf...531&issueID=43

http://www.usmedicine.com/dailyNews.cfm?dailyID=114

Its not a left or right issue. The issue is a goverment, be it Dem or Repub, that believes the "cause" is more important than individual rights.

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

dksuddeth

well, i'm having a bit of an issue with the generalizations and labels on whichever side people look at this. Roachboy says 'first, the op comes from a particular political position.', but does that automatically make it a left or right position? Then people are saying that certain conservatives don't like hippies, etc.

I didn't realize that trying to point out acts that prohibit or limit constitutional rights and freedoms made someone a liberal or conservative. I also didn't realize that only hippies led/participated in protests. I'm far from being 'liberal' and i'm certainly not 'conservative', in fact, if you were to see me in person you're first reaction would probably be to call me a hippy since my hair goes down to the middle of my back, does that make me a liberal?

why is it that people have to define inalienable rights on a left/right basis? why is it that those who DO split it up, decide to do it based on the 'worthiness' of the person?

It probably won't matter much longer anyway. The way that THIS psychotic gun nut see's it, neither left or right will be free much longer, but everybody will be too damn busy blaming the other side for it to see who's fault it really is.

__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

Rekna

I'm calling bullshit on this. There has been plenty of violence perpetrated at protests by right wingers. At anti-gay rights or anti-abortion ralleys. Hell even at pro-gay, pro-abortion ralleys where people from the right come down to make trouble. Just because violence occurs at a left or right ralley does not mean that group holding the ralley perpetrated it. Your statement portrays the left as violent people but yet it is the left who cries for peace. From my experience the left tend to be much less agressive and violent than the right.

dc_dux

Rekna....why even bother responding to Ustwo's inane posts...that often seem to me to be more for the purpose of "baiting" the left or anyone who doesnt share his position on an issue than contributing to a constructive dialogue?

But what do I know. I'm still a roookie.

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

dksuddeth

my experience shows that both sides can be equally aggressive.

__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

Ustwo

Call bullshit all you want, the riots as of late are not from the right. Please give examples.

Which protests were those will?

Edit: HAHAHAHAHA I was only guessing....
"MICROWAVE MIND-CONTROL"
http://www.mindcontrolforums.com/pro...uk/mmc_tf.html

Also while lots of wacky sites seem to claim microwaves cause cancer, in fact so many I couldn't find any real data, I, as a biologist have to wonder how microwaves are causing DNA damage. They should not be able to as they lack the frequency needed to.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Willravel

-tear gas was at the WTO, 1999
-beanbag gun I believe was in Sacramento, but I can't remember what we were protesting

they both suck

Well ultraviolet radiation (non-ionizing radiation) does cause skin cancer, including malignant melanoma. I don't know how UV rays do it, but they do. The same could be true of microwaves. Also, I think that you can agree that a powerful enough microwave can boild the liquid inside our bodies and do tempororary or perminant damage, or even kill.

Seaver

I saw the protests all over the news. I saw all sorts of chaos that more than warranted the tear gas.

__________________
"Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of unstinted wealth will gush forth." - Ashbel Smith as he laid the first cornerstone of the University of Texas

Ch'i

Would you mind posting some of your examples as well UsTwo? I find it disturbing that you always try to make any political argument about being right of left. If I'm right and your left, what should it matter; evaluate the argument, and respond. Insulting without reason is an attempt at provocation, and dilutes the actual discussion. And maybe that is your intention, because you usually ignor posts which reasonably question your own political perspectives. I don't know. Stop your argumentum ad hominem and address the issue.

Willravel

Well I wasn't chaotic in the least. I was standing there with a home made sign that was so clever that I forgot what it was. I did not deserve burns on my eyes, face and skin. I did not deserve to be hit in the leg by some idiot cop who figured that all hippies were alike. I went there to be involved in a legal protest for something I felt strongly about. I don't condone the actions of the protesters who became violent, as in my mind violent protest is a serious contradiction in terms, but the police were equally violent and out of control. It was a case of escelation, and MANY people were injured seriously because of a few idiots.

Elphaba

Seattle citizens were shocked at what happened at WTO, and the local media were told that out of state anarchists were responsible for the violence and damage. True? It seems reasonable because most of the people there were peaceful, but I really don't know.

What was also reported by the media is that the police security numbers were far too small for the violence that occurred. Seattle didn't anticipate the draw the WTO has of very angry people. Overreaction by the police at that point became one of the major focal points of criticism levied at the city.
Rightfully so imo.

Will, I am sorry that you experienced Seattle in the worst possible light.


Back on topic. This statement floored me:
Honey, if you hurt an American citizen you will learn quickly about vilification on your own doorstep. That logic is incomprehensible to me.

Willravel

I LOVE SEATTLE. I would never let one bad experience ruin such a beautiful place for me. Seattle is like Portland when it grows up.


Also, your new avatar is giving me nightmares.

Elphaba

Me, too. It was for the movie "evil person" thread.

roachboy

so ustwo is demonstrating one point i made earlier: that conservatives like to think state violence disappears when it is directed in ways they approve of. they even stop thinking of it as violence. freedom of assembly, freedom of speech--non issues for the ustwo set--freedom to dissent?--apparently for ustwo, dissent has a dress code.
go figure.

what i see above from most of the republicans here is a refusal to take public protest seriously as a way of exercizing freedom of speech.

what i also see is a pretty deep ignorance of police violence in sparking much of the more destructive interactions with protestors, particularly in the series of protests around the g8/wto. i can't tell if this is willful ignorance or not, so i'll leave it at that for the moment. but then again, if you can't recognize public protest as a way of exercizing freedom of speech, not being able to recognize police violence as being in any way problematic kinda follows.


complicating aside for the protestors:
the black block.
personally, i think the black block is stupid.
the idea was to divert police away from beating up protestors by making them chase a secondary group around that would demonstrate their anarchist street credibility by breaking shit.
the black block then is a symptom of the routine violence brought down by police in certain types of protests.

i know quite a few folk who have been part of black block actions--in general they are of the school that your political credibility is in direct relation to direct conflict with the cops.
i simply do not find that useful politically---and almost all of these same folk have a more emotional than worked out type of opposition to the existing order.
but maybe i am just older then they are.


on the other hand: none of the institutions involved with the actual administration of the modes whereby globalizing capitalism is being developed/implemented are democratically accountable to anyone. you would think this lack of accountability would be a problem--but no. people turn out to protest at g8/wto type meetings as an expression of frustration over this total lack of accountability.
and there is every reason to be angry and frustrated about this, and those who are have every right to bring whatever form of pressure they think will function to bear on these groups/institutions to change.

nothing is served--at all--by sanctioning anything like an increased militarization of the police when the main problem behind actions like seattle is the lack of democratic accountability on the part of the main institutions that currrently determine what globalizing capitalism looks like.

you woudnt think conservatives would be comfortable with this situation either, frankly.
but maybe ustwo is right, and most conservatives who are troubled by the autocratic nature of the wto. world bank, imf, etc. yell at their tv sets in their living rooms.
or maybe they like autocratic economic institutions.
who can say?

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite