-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Charges against the police at RNC?
- Thread starter Apex
- Start date
lilithu
The Devil's Advocate
Glad you brought this up.
The supposedly liberal media was reporting to the rest of the country that some of the protesters got violent and therefore the police were forced to take action. However, people who were there on the ground say that the police attacked peaceful protesters.
St. Paul became a police state. Hundreds of peaceful protesters were maced, tasered, and are still in jail days later. Also, journalists. Thanks to the "Patriot" Act, it is now illegal to *document* police when they claim they're doing 'anti-terrorism' work. Independent media headquarters have been raided twice, with computers and cameras seized. And none of this is getting reported in the mainstream media. Thank God for the blogosphere.
Media Silent, But Activist Groups Loud About RNC Police Brutality | PEEK | AlterNet
Taxpayers off the hook for GOP convention lawsuits
For the record, Amy Goodwin of NPR was among those journalists arrested. Some of you may not like Goodwin because of her liberal perspective, but I dare anyone to claim that she is a "violent protester."
YouTube - Amy Goodman's Arrest + Press Conference asked about arrest
Last edited:
Apex
Somewhere Around Nothing
After reading numerous articles online and even an article in my campus newspaper (a couple students here were among those arrested and abused, they held a panel about it last night) about the police brutality I think I understand a little better what happened. It sounds like there was a violent group of protesters, who threw feces, spit on those attending the convention, sprayed them with bleach, threw objects, slashed tires and so on. However, this group was a minority when compared to the number of peaceful protesters in attendance. I think the violent protesters basically ****** things up for everyone else. The police got over zealous and began treating everyone as if they were violent when they had no reason to.
I am really hoping police get strung out to dry for their actions.
lilithu
The Devil's Advocate
Yes. Not just in terms of the police but the media as well. 10,000 people showed up to protest the war in Iraq. 10,000 Americans who felt so strongly on this war that they took the time to go to St. Paul to tell the GOP how they felt. And maybe 1% of them were violent. (Idiots!!) And what does the media report to the rest of the country?? That there were protesters at the RNC who got violent.
Those who were violent should have been arrested -- though this may be problematic if they were actually police agents provocateurs.
Peaceful protesters should have been left alone.
When you assemble a virtual battalion of police from all over the country to deal with a handful of protesters you're just asking for a police riot.
Republicans seem terrified of the people. The people must be suppressed at all costs.
What were the Republicans thinking? Why are they so fearful of dissent? Why do they feel the need to both quash dissent and to hide all evidence of it (police raided several "liberal leaning" legal, licensed, legitimate, news offices before the convention and took all their computers, hard-drives, cameras, &c).
In 1968 the whole world was watching. Today the minions of Fascism have gotten much more sophisticated.
Peaceful protesters should have been left alone.
When you assemble a virtual battalion of police from all over the country to deal with a handful of protesters you're just asking for a police riot.
Republicans seem terrified of the people. The people must be suppressed at all costs.
What were the Republicans thinking? Why are they so fearful of dissent? Why do they feel the need to both quash dissent and to hide all evidence of it (police raided several "liberal leaning" legal, licensed, legitimate, news offices before the convention and took all their computers, hard-drives, cameras, &c).
In 1968 the whole world was watching. Today the minions of Fascism have gotten much more sophisticated.
lilithu
The Devil's Advocate
Are these rhetorical questions? :sarcastic
It's the same reason why they are afraid of community organizers.
The GOP philosophy is top-down. The commander-in-chief gives the orders and everyone else obeys. Of course they would be afraid of people who actually try to empower themselves and each other, to work from the bottom-up.
Even the GOP mantra against "big government" is anti-people. Government is "of the people, by the people, for the people." Take govt (ie - people) power away and what you have is corporations with nothing to hold them accountable.
Apex
Somewhere Around Nothing
Wait? I thought the Republicans were in the convention center. When did they leave and put on riot gear?
Blaming the police brutality on the Republicans is total nonsense. The individual police officers are the ones who should be held responsible. Unless you can prove that some high ranking Republicans somehow "ordered" the police to beat the **** out of everyone (which would make no sense as the police are not responsible to party officials), in which case both those officials and the police would need to be held responsible.
The police were not just local constables, Apex. The RNC brought in police from any department that could spare them in unbelievable numbers. I'm surprized there wasn't a Red Army contingent (perhaps there was...:sarcastic). The police vastly outnumbered the protesters.
The police were the de facto dissent supression arm of the Republican Party. We're not going to find any written "beat the Hippies" orders, but then Hitler and Charlie Manson gave no direct orders to hurt anyone either.
The police were the de facto dissent supression arm of the Republican Party. We're not going to find any written "beat the Hippies" orders, but then Hitler and Charlie Manson gave no direct orders to hurt anyone either.
Apex
Somewhere Around Nothing
We've got references to "commies", one of the most infamous American murderers, and an invocation of Godwin's Law all in the same post. You deserve an award for that. What you said also changes nothing in regard to the police being responsible for their own actions. The fact that they came in specifically for the RNC does not mean the Republicans are automatically to blame. Again I ask if you have any evidence for this? If there is then they should be held responsible along side the police, if there is not, then this is nothing more than anti-Republican hatred that gets spewed all the time right along side anti-Democrat hatred.
lilithu
The Devil's Advocate
The extra police was part of the agreement between the city of St. Paul and the RNC. In fact, it says in the second article I posted that St. Paul insisted that the RNC pay for $10 million in insurance for lawsuits stemming from police brutality. That says to me that the GOP requested in advance that police crack down on protesters and the city said, "Ok, but you're gonna pay for the lawsuits."
Besides, cops over-reacting to some violent protesters does not explain the raiding of news offices.
Apex
Somewhere Around Nothing
That is still not evidence that the Republicans told the police to beat the **** out of everyone. Look, I am not trying to defend the Republicans here. I am trying to state the facts. The police screwed up and they should pay for it. Plain and simple. Saying the Republicans specifically ordered the police brutality is complicating the issue beyond the available facts.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
I gotta say it... gestapo tactics. Tee hee..:run:
lilithu
The Devil's Advocate
Please explain how the police going off on protesters would explain their raiding left-leaning media offices.
Apex
Somewhere Around Nothing
Uhhh, not sure what you mean. I thought it was explained by the police being overly paranoid and forgetting what is and is not legal.
You don't have to tell police to "beat the **** out of people. That's what they do. It's understood.
Just look at history: Demonstration, peaceful or otherwise, + police = overreaction. From Amritsar to Albuquerque, police do not tolerate those who question authority. They take it as a personal affront.
Just look at history: Demonstration, peaceful or otherwise, + police = overreaction. From Amritsar to Albuquerque, police do not tolerate those who question authority. They take it as a personal affront.