Massive New York Protest

[rmcrobertson]

Absolutely right. Thank Satan, I can now reveal the truth--for years, funded by the Kremlin (I mean, you haven't bought that crap from the Liberal media about the Fall of Communism in the Soviet Union, have you? Fools!!), I have travelled and got on the Internet to spread lesbianism.

Hell, I make over 250, 000 a year, weeviling away at decency and American values. They've offered me a bonus if I kill God.

And in the specific case of New York, well, I know I shouldn't be telling you this--but those 100,000 plus protestors? Paid for by Rob Reiner and Ollie North (I mean, you didn't know who he really works for? Oh, dear.)

Meanwhile, back on the planet...

 

[michaeledward]

The protesters were no even close to the convention, no permits were issued
unless you agreed to be caged and penned up. As for local cooperation you didn't have a choice. I know I did security for the DNC and saw it first hand.

At least in New York they get there first Amendment right.

Protest permits were issued in Boston. There was a list of some of those protest groups listed in this thread:
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=16782

And in New York, you can not peaceably assemble in Central Park.

 

[Nightingale]

My dad and his family are from New York. That entire half of the family are staunch republicans and FORMER Bush supporters.

the reason they're FORMER Bush supporters?

Because Bush has been using 9/11 to get himself re-elected. That's why footage has been on TV, and why the convention is in NYC.

Every New Yorker I know, republican, democrat, libertarian alike is damn pissed. They're angry because Bush is taking a tragedy that happened to THEIR city, and using it as a tool to get himself four more years in the white house. Its got people spitting mad. They don't want people using a tragedy that happened to them, to their friends and loved ones, to their city, for their own personal gain.

My friend (who is NOT a democrat) who is a born and raised New Yorker, and recently moved back there said that it was like "They're holding a party on the corpses of 3000 people."

 

[Tgace]

I think the point is that protesting motivated by antagonism instead of the desire to promote reform is destructive because it just prolongs factioning and tends to be 'anti-someone' instead of about the topic. We have seen it here on a much smaller scale. How many times have we pleaded for a "stay on the topic" style of discussion instead of the "you suck" arguments that accuse someone of a motive.

The idea isn't that the Republicans are America, but that protest should not be to cut someone else down (as the language generally does regardless of the issue or people) so much as raising awareness/education/counterpoint to issues.

For all the cries for civil behavior and decorum here, there seems to be a lot of permissiveness about civil disobedience for the 'real world.' What happens when one of these civil disturbers/protesters gets hurt? Who is at fault? Do we demonize the secret service or NYPD for doing there job? Do we blaim that "Damn Bush" for something that was instigated by a person who chose to flout the law? I would say it comes down to personal accountability ON ALL SIDES.

Call me an idealist, but I thought the idea of AMERICA was about "One Nation (under God), with liberty and justice for all", NOT a nation that spends more time hacking at people/groups to try and discredit them.

I'm sorry, but I read some of this stuff and fear that we are far from the National Unity of WWII (tempered with reality that there were criticisms and factions then too) that helped stop the Reich from spreading that could rally 'round the flag so to speak and have moved to a Nation of UNITS that spend more time complaining about what someone else has or does. Maybe the lack of this behavior at the Demo Convention was because the Republicans weren't stirring for publicity in the same way not the assumption that the lack of protesting means approval or support.

Thanks bud...you express my opinion better than I can.

 

[Cryozombie]

My dad and his family are from New York. That entire half of the family are staunch republicans and FORMER Bush supporters.

the reason they're FORMER Bush supporters?

Because Bush has been using 9/11 to get himself re-elected. That's why footage has been on TV, and why the convention is in NYC.

Every New Yorker I know, republican, democrat, libertarian alike is damn pissed. They're angry because Bush is taking a tragedy that happened to THEIR city, and using it as a tool to get himself four more years in the white house. Its got people spitting mad. They don't want people using a tragedy that happened to them, to their friends and loved ones, to their city, for their own personal gain.

My friend (who is NOT a democrat) who is a born and raised New Yorker, and recently moved back there said that it was like "They're holding a party on the corpses of 3000 people."

Perhaps New Yorkers should recall...

I happened in OUR COUNTRY... not THIER CITY.

 

[Tgace]

Perhaps New Yorkers should recall...

I happened in OUR COUNTRY... not THIER CITY.

NYC is my city too.....my state taxes all go there.

 

[Nightingale]

Whether it was a city tragedy, a national tragedy, or both, many New Yorkers feel very angry that it is being used as a tool to get someone re-elected.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Well, thank god that nobody puts loyalty to their town or city above national needs. I mean, if they did, we'd have all sorts of rivalries built around silly things like civic pride and sports teams...

 

[MisterMike]

Yankees SUCK.

On a more serious note, sports fans are not the problem.

 

[Makalakumu]

Protest permits were issued in Boston. There was a list of some of those protest groups listed in this thread:
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=16782

And in New York, you can not peaceably assemble in Central Park.

Mike, I've heard the multiple times about the free speech zones at the DNC. Do you have the scoop on this? You actually live in MA.

 

[Makalakumu]

Thanks bud...you express my opinion better than I can.

So, when is civil disobedience okay? Was it okay for a black person to refuse to go to the back of the bus in 64? That certainly was against the popular opinion.

 

[michaeledward]

I think the point is that protesting motivated by antagonism instead of the desire to promote reform is destructive because it just prolongs factioning and tends to be 'anti-someone' instead of about the topic. We have seen it here on a much smaller scale. How many times have we pleaded for a "stay on the topic" style of discussion instead of the "you suck" arguments that accuse someone of a motive.

The idea isn't that the Republicans are America, but that protest should not be to cut someone else down (as the language generally does regardless of the issue or people) so much as raising awareness/education/counterpoint to issues.

For all the cries for civil behavior and decorum here, there seems to be a lot of permissiveness about civil disobedience for the 'real world.' What happens when one of these civil disturbers/protesters gets hurt? Who is at fault? Do we demonize the secret service or NYPD for doing there job? Do we blaim that "Damn Bush" for something that was instigated by a person who chose to flout the law? I would say it comes down to personal accountability ON ALL SIDES.

Call me an idealist, but I thought the idea of AMERICA was about "One Nation (under God), with liberty and justice for all", NOT a nation that spends more time hacking at people/groups to try and discredit them.

I'm sorry, but I read some of this stuff and fear that we are far from the National Unity of WWII (tempered with reality that there were criticisms and factions then too) that helped stop the Reich from spreading that could rally 'round the flag so to speak and have moved to a Nation of UNITS that spend more time complaining about what someone else has or does. Maybe the lack of this behavior at the Demo Convention was because the Republicans weren't stirring for publicity in the same way not the assumption that the lack of protesting means approval or support.

OK Paul ... I'll bite. I know you are a peacemaker, and I can respect that. But sometimes it is appropriate to step beyond what you ask for.

Perhaps you hear Mr. O'Neill's description of the president; 'A blind man in a roomful of deaf people.' If that is how one perceives the current state of power in the United States, how do you suggest they; 'raise awareness/educate/counter'? When our President refuses to listen to scientists who state that Homo Sapiens are having an impact on Global Climate Change, what are we to do?

I have stated over and over again, that it is the Bush Administration and Bush Policies that I have a problem with. I don't care if he sucks or not. And I don't make the claim that he does ... and I don't see many arguing against him who make that statement. But I see some on the other side of the isle make those statements about protestors, liberals, and me.

You ask "What happens when one of these civil disturbers/protesters gets hurt? Who is at fault?". I ask, 'What happens when one of our military soldiers gets hurt or killed in Iraq? Who is at fault'. We were told that the Iraqi government had the weapons and were an imminent threat, but when that has proved false, who is held accountable? In this adminstration; No One. Instead the argument changes that 'Saddam Hussein' was a bad man, an evil man, he had to be removed, yet we watch the destruction and ethnic cleansing in Darfur, Sudan with nary lifting a finger; who is held accountable?
In this administration; No One .... (But blame will fall on the prior administration for Rwanda).

And if America is supposed to be One Nation with Liberty and Justice for All, how is that we prevent gay americans from sharing the same liberty and justice as their straight brothers and sisters? While the United States Supreme Court recently over-ruled 13 states' sodomy laws, gay partners still are not entitled to the same social justice provided by a marriage contract. Are you out fighting for their rights? And who is it that is trying to keep the gays in their closets? (Oddly, I find myself in agreement with Vice President Cheney for, perhaps, the first time in my life).

Of course we have moved from the 'National Unity of WW II'. That time was quite probably never as unified as you imagine it, and what unity existed was not necissarliy caused solely by the the Axis powers. You will recall that the decade preceeding the United States entry into WWII was known as the Great Depression. People being at work probably went a long way to creating 'unity'. Of course, once we won that war, the government has continued to feed the machine. Money going from the Treasury into the Defense Contractors; Lockheed, Martin, Boeing, Ratheon, McDonald, Douglas. Keep that war machine going ... Never mind there was never an enemy that could match the US Military. Do you remember the claims that Iraq had the 4th largest army in the world, and how they were going to be difficult to defeat in 1991? To this day, I don't understand how anyone could buy that bill of goods. What of our current military ... why do we need to spend more on weapons than the next 10 nations combined? Who do we think we are going to be fighting? And isn't it a good thing that Alaska is now protected by a Missile Defense Shield. More money going to worthless defense programs.

Anyhow ... there are lots of reason why we must protest against something. But not every protestor hates America, or even hates Bush. What I want, is the promise of my country; a place where all men are created equal, and we have equal opportunity to succeed. And when I see impedements to myself, or my fellow citizens, it is appropriate to raise voice or sign in protest.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

I thought this of interest, given the location of the convention:


Released: August 30, 2004
Half of New Yorkers Believe US Leaders Had Foreknowledge of Impending 9-11 Attacks and “Consciously Failed” To Act; 66% Call For New Probe of Unanswered Questions by Congress or New York’s Attorney General, New Zogby International Poll Reveals



On the eve of a Republican National Convention invoking 9/11 symbols, sound bytes and imagery, half (49.3%) of New York City residents and 41% of New York citizens overall say that some of our leaders "knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act," according to the poll conducted by Zogby International. The poll of New York residents was conducted from Tuesday August 24 through Thursday August 26, 2004. Overall results have a margin of sampling error of +/-3.5.

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=855


Regards,


Steve

 

[michaeledward]

Mike, I've heard the multiple times about the free speech zones at the DNC. Do you have the scoop on this? You actually live in MA.

Not really any scoop ...

The DNC had relatively few protest groups. Either the Secret Service, DHS, Boston Police or the DNC had a fenced in 'Free Speech Cage' ... a fenced in area that would hold, I think 1500 people under the highway in Boston. It was supposedly within sight and sound of the Fleet Center. But the protest rallies had to be held inside this box ... an abomination!

In New York City ... protestors can gather in Central Park, but no staging or sound amplification devices may be set up there. The 'Great Lawn' of Central Park apparently was refurbished in the last year, and the protest groups could have held their meetings there (theoretically) if they had purchased a $16,000,000.00 bond to ensure the lawn would be protected.

and finally, stating the Obvious ... If I can only exercise my right of Free Speech in a certain area, aren't my rights restricted? How did that 1st Amendment go again?

Yesterday ... outside Bush's campaign stop ... I showed the 'WWMD' sign to the people driving by ... and the '1st Amendment' sign to the police and secret service.

mike

 

[michaeledward]

Released: August 30, 2004
Half of New Yorkers Believe US Leaders Had Foreknowledge of Impending 9-11 Attacks and “Consciously Failed” To Act; 66% Call For New Probe of Unanswered Questions by Congress or New York’s Attorney General, New Zogby International Poll Reveals

On the eve of a Republican National Convention invoking 9/11 symbols, sound bytes and imagery, half (49.3%) of New York City residents and 41% of New York citizens overall say that some of our leaders "knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act," according to the poll conducted by Zogby International.

I wonder ... do you think it may have something to do with this?

August 6, PDB​

Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.
Clandestine, foreign government, and media reports indicate Bin Ladensince 1997 has wanted to conduct terrorist attacks in the U.S. Bin Laden implied in U.S. television interviews in 1997 and 1998 that his followers would follow the example of World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef and "bringthe fighting to America." :
After U.S. missile strikes on his base in Afghanistan in 1998, Bin Ladentold followers he wanted to retaliate in Washington, according to a [deleted text] service.
An Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ) operative told [deleted text] serviceat the same time that Bin Laden was planning to exploit the operative'saccess to the U.S. to mount a terrorist strike.
The millennium plotting in Canada in 1999 may have been part of Bin Laden's first serious attempt to implement a terrorist strike in the U.S. Convicted plotter Ahmed Ressam has told the FBI that he conceived the idea to attack Los Angeles International Airport himself, but that BinLaden lieutenant Abu Zubaydah encouraged him and helped facilitate theoperation. Ressam also said that in 1998 Abu Zubaydah was planning hisown U.S. attack.
Ressam says Bin Laden was aware of the Los Angeles operation.
Although Bin Laden has not succeeded, his attacks against the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 demonstrate that he preparesoperations years in advance and is not deterred by setbacks. Bin Laden associates surveilled our Embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam as early as 1993, and some members of the Nairobi cell planning the bombings were arrested and deported in 1997.
AI Qaeda members -- including same who are U.S. citizens -- have resided in and traveled to the U.S. for years, and the group apparently maintains asupport structure that could aid attacks.
Two Al Qaeda members found guiltyin the conspiracy to bomb our embassies in East Africa were U.S. citizens, and a senior EIJ member lived in California in the mid-1990s.
A clandestine sourcesaid in 1998 that a Bin Laden cell in New Yorkwas recruiting Muslim-American youth for attacks.
We havenot been able to corroborate some of the more sensational threat reporting, such as that from a [deleted text] service in 1998 saying that Bin Laden wanted to hijack a U.S. aircraft to gain the release of "Blind Shaykh" 'Umar' Abd aI-Rahman and other U.S.-held extremists. Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns ofsuspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations forhijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance offederal buildings in New York. The FBI is conducting approximately 70 investigations throughout the U.S. that it considers Bin Laden-related. CIA and the FBI are investigating a call to our embassy in the UAE in May sayingthat a group or Bin Laden supporters was in the U.S. planning attacks with explosives.

[font=Palatino Linotype,Helvetica]Fact Sheet [/font]
The August 6, 2001 Pdb

On the other hand, we must remember that as of October, 2003 the majority of Americans believed;a) there was clear evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the September 11, 2001 attacks; b) the majority of world public opinion was in favor of the United States invading and deposing Saddam Hussein c) the United States had discovered Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq.

As of today ... that is 975 American Soldiers dead in Iraq.

 

[Makalakumu]

Not really any scoop ...

The DNC had relatively few protest groups. Either the Secret Service, DHS, Boston Police or the DNC had a fenced in 'Free Speech Cage' ... a fenced in area that would hold, I think 1500 people under the highway in Boston. It was supposedly within sight and sound of the Fleet Center. But the protest rallies had to be held inside this box ... an abomination!

In New York City ... protestors can gather in Central Park, but no staging or sound amplification devices may be set up there. The 'Great Lawn' of Central Park apparently was refurbished in the last year, and the protest groups could have held their meetings there (theoretically) if they had purchased a $16,000,000.00 bond to ensure the lawn would be protected.

and finally, stating the Obvious ... If I can only exercise my right of Free Speech in a certain area, aren't my rights restricted? How did that 1st Amendment go again?

Yesterday ... outside Bush's campaign stop ... I showed the 'WWMD' sign to the people driving by ... and the '1st Amendment' sign to the police and secret service.

mike

The really scary part about this is that if both sides begin using free speech zones it will become commonplace. I feel like trends like this will turn our political process and eventually our constitution into a sham. :idunno:

 

[Patrick Skerry]

The really scary part about this is that if both sides begin using free speech zones it will become commonplace. I feel like trends like this will turn our political process and eventually our constitution into a sham. :idunno:

Judicial activists have already turned our political process and constitution into a sham!

 

[Tgace]

In-your-face activists bedevil some delegates
By CONNIE MABIN
Associated Press
8/31/2004

NEW YORK - As the Republican National Convention began Monday, not everyone in New York was rolling out the welcome mat.
Some Ohioans were told to turn their GOP T-shirts inside out and hide convention credentials, to be more low-key about their party passion.

Other delegates said anti-Bush protesters made obscene gestures and yelled profanities at them. In neighborhoods and boroughs far from Madison Square Garden, New York residents taped anti-Republican signs to their apartment windows.

Florida delegate Sid Dinerstein was walking the few blocks between his Sixth Avenue hotel and a restaurant on Sunday evening when he said a protester pushed his way in front of him, blew a whistle in his face and yelled, "Go home!"

Dinerstein, who grew up in Brooklyn, said he was unaffected and didn't plan to change any of his plans to accommodate those who may be less than welcoming.

Missouri delegate John Winston, 58, of suburban St. Louis, said he had been cursed at and told to go home - or elsewhere - by protesters.

For the most part, he was understanding.

"Most of them are young," Winston said. "All of us, when you're young, go through a stage when you want to rebel."

Though there was plenty of grumbling, New York police said Monday no official complaints had been filed.

George Artz, a New York political consultant who has worked with former Mayor Ed Koch, said most city residents are friendly to tourists, regardless of their political party. He added that many of the people in town for protest marches were not from the city.

"New Yorkers may be 5-to-1 Democrat, but they know what it is to be congenial," Artz said.

Maybe so, but the reception for delegates was not all friendly.

"A guy was screaming and yelling in my face," said Darren White, a delegate from Albuquerque, N.M. "They screamed and yelled that Republicans weren't welcome in New York."

Grace Kudukis, a delegate from Cleveland, said some protesters who marched near the delegation's Times Square hotel Sunday gestured obscenely at delegates and shouted rude comments about the president.

Some convention security officers suggested in response that delegates hide their credentials and any other signs that they were Republicans, including telling one man to turn his T-shirt inside out to hide the elephant symbol, she said.

"I just felt violated," Kudukis said. "I have a right to be in the city. We have a two-party system and should be able to exist together.

"As an American, I'm afraid to be identified as a Republican. It's a shame."

Minnesotans came prepared for dissent. Their delegation received a memo telling them not to engage critics in debate, not to get impatient when maneuvering around protests, and to treat demonstrators with respect.

"Unlike pre-war Iraq and Afghanistan, people in America are free to peacefully protest and speak their minds," the memo said.

"I have no problems with those people telling me their ideas and thoughts. I'll be listening," said Dr. Richard Mulder, a delegate from Ivanhoe, Minn. "I have free speech, too. I can give them my ideas, too. That's what this country is all about."

 

[loki09789]

Just curious. Could you provide some kind of criteria a MAist should use before the decide to protest in this fashion? If an MAist refused to go to the bus in 1964 because he/she was black, was that a betrayal of these ideals of which you have indicated?

upnorthkyosa

This was kind of hard to decypher (must have been thinking faster than you were typing. Happens to me all the time).

If you mean Blacks boycotting bus service because of segretative seating with your reference, it is far from the same thing as people waving signs that connote a hatred for a politician or a party and then cheering/encouraging/aiding people to basically trespass, disturb someone elses PEACEFUL and authorized assembly simply because they don't agree with it.

THe first it a legal act and peaceful. Even when Dr. King was leading marches, they were peaceful. Charging into some Rep Conv function acting like a streaker isn't quite the same thing as that.

I don't know if anyone remembers the news footage of a 'protester' who slipped through security while the POTUS was giving a speech and got within arms length. He claimed that his act of 'civil disobedience' was motivated by a dissatisfaction with some Administration agenda... that really helped his cause.

 

[Makalakumu]

Sorry for the syntax confusion. When I write professionally, I need to proofread at least twice as much as a normal person. The only reason I asked the question before is because I wanted to see if there was a line for you. For me, I try to follow my principles. If I feel like something is hostile to my principles and there is no other recourse, I would (and have) engaged in protest. Personally, I've yet to be thrown in jail though.