Cyber Nations Forums: G20 - Cyber Nations Forums

Jump to content


  • (4 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

G20 And the protest are off Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is offline   steodonn 

  • BOHSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!&
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,250
  • Joined: 05-June 07
  • Nation Name:Dun Carrig
  • Alliance Name:CSN

Posted 24 September 2009 - 03:22 PM

Quote

By DANIEL LOVERING and MICHAEL RUBINKAM, Associated Press Writers Daniel Lovering And Michael Rubinkam, Associated Press Writers – 1 min ago PITTSBURGH – Police threw canisters of pepper spray and smoke at marchers protesting the Group of 20 summit Thursday after anarchists responded to calls to disperse by rolling trash bins and throwing rocks.

The march turned chaotic at just about the same time that President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama arrived for a meeting with leaders of the world's major economies.

The clashes began after hundreds of protesters, many advocating against capitalism, tried to march from an outlying neighborhood toward the convention center where the summit is being held.

Police in riot gear stood guard near the protesters, who banged on drums and chanted "Ain't no power like the power of the people, 'cause the power of the people don't stop."

The hundreds of marchers included small groups of self-described anarchists, some wearing dark clothes and bandanas and carrying black flags. Others wore helmets and safety goggles.

Some held a banner that read, "No borders, no thanks." Another banner read, "No hope in capitalism." A few minutes into the march, protesters unfurled a large banner reading "NO BAILOUT NO CAPITALISM" with an encircled "A," a recognized sign of anarchists.

The marchers did not have a permit and, after a few blocks, police declared it an unlawful assembly. They played an announcement over a loudspeaker telling people to leave or face arrest and then moved in to break it up.

Protesters split into smaller groups. Some rolled large metal trash bins toward police, and a man in a black hooded sweat shirt threw rocks at a police car, breaking the front windshield. Some protesters used pallets and corrugated steel to block a road. Police said the windows at one bank branch were broken.

Officers fired pepper spray and smoke at the protesters. Some of those exposed to the pepper spray coughed and complained that their eyes were watering and stinging.

About an hour after the clashes started, the police and protesters were at a standoff. Police sealed off main thoroughfares to downtown. Some of the protesters were seen ducking into alleyways to change out of their all-black clothing and then milling about in the street.

Twenty-one-year-old Stephon Boatwright, of Syracuse, N.Y., wore a mask of English anarchist Guy Fawkes and walked up and down in front of a line of riot police yelling at them. He then sat cross-legged about eight feet from the riot line, telling the police to let the protesters through and to join their cause.

"You're actively suppressing us. I know you want to move," Boatwright yelled, to applause from the protesters gathered around him.

Protesters complained that the march had been peaceful and that police were trampling on their right to assemble.

"We were standing there. We were barely even protesting. We were really just watching the line," said T.J. Amick, 22, of Pittsburgh. "Then all of a sudden, they come up and tell us we're gathered illegally and start using force, start banging their shields, start telling us we're going to be arrested and tear gassed. But we're just standing there watching them. We haven't broken any laws."

Bret Hatch, 26, of Green Bay, Wis., was carrying an American flag and a "Don't Tread on Me" flag.

"This is ridiculous. We have constitutional rights to free speech," he said.

The march had begun at a city park, where an activist from New York City, dressed in a white suit with a preacher's collar, started it off with a speech through a bullhorn.

"They are not operating on Earth time. ... They are accommodating the devil," he said. "To love democracy and to love the earth is to be a radical now."

The activist, Billy Talen, travels the country preaching against consumerism. He initially identified himself as "the Rev. Billy from the Church of Life After Shopping."

The G-20 summit begins Thursday evening with a welcome ceremony and ends late Friday afternoon after a day of meetings at the David L. Lawrence Convention Center.

Dignitaries were arriving in waves and were heading to a city under heavy security. Police and National Guard troops guarded many downtown intersections, and a maze of tall metal fences and concrete barriers shunted cars and pedestrians.


http://news.yahoo.co...summit_protests

Quote

The marchers did not have a permit and, after a few blocks, police declared it an unlawful assembly. They played an announcement over a loudspeaker telling people to leave or face arrest and then moved in to break it up.


Ridiculous. You have a right to free speech and to protest............only if you a have permit

#2 User is offline   Foggers 

  • Son of Uther Pendragon
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,928
  • Joined: 23-August 08
  • Nation Name:Domunism

Posted 24 September 2009 - 03:30 PM

These dissidents must be crushed.

#3 User is offline   King Diamond 

  • Not the REAL King Diamond...
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 465
  • Joined: 12-August 09
  • Nation Name:Mercyful Fate
  • Alliance Name:Siberian Tiger Alliance

Posted 24 September 2009 - 04:13 PM

"Unlawful" assembly? !@#$@#$ joke....
Expressing your constitutional right is "unlawful"

#4 User is offline   Loki Ire 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5,358
  • Joined: 28-November 07
  • Nation Name:Loki Imperium
  • Alliance Name:Ubercon

Posted 24 September 2009 - 04:44 PM

Quote

Some of those exposed to the pepper spray coughed and complained that their eyes were watering and stinging.


Geniuses, all of them.

Quote

"They are not operating on Earth time. ... They are accommodating the devil," he said. "To love democracy and to love the earth is to be a radical now."

The activist, Billy Talen, travels the country preaching against consumerism. He initially identified himself as "the Rev. Billy from the Church of Life After Shopping."


Wow, I don't know if the writing is just terrible or if these people really are this nuts. Needless to say, take the article with a grain of salt.

Don't forget to pick up the official uniform for the G20 protest: Posted Image

This post has been edited by Loki Ire: 24 September 2009 - 04:47 PM


#5 User is offline   hawk_11 

  • Tech Miner
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,188
  • Joined: 14-June 07
  • Nation Name:Bastok
  • Alliance Name:New Pacific Order

Posted 24 September 2009 - 05:13 PM

Usually large assemblies that are capable of disrupting daily routines in urban areas are required to fill out some paper work so the town can adjust, yes. That is what the permits are for. You have the right to protest in a large, unorganized riot; just fill out the paperwork so the city can fence off some street for you and divert traffic.

#6 User is offline   mastab 

  • UNTRUST US
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 14,477
  • Joined: 03-September 07
  • Nation Name:Kaeva
  • Alliance Name:Gramlins

Posted 24 September 2009 - 05:42 PM

The permit requirement may be for safety in some situations, but it was clearly not here. No permit would have been given to the demonstrators because a show of solidarity against statism and capitalism would make carrying out the agenda of the statists and capitalists more difficult. When there is no legal route to do what you have a right to do, acting outside of the law is acceptable.

#7 User is offline   hawk_11 

  • Tech Miner
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,188
  • Joined: 14-June 07
  • Nation Name:Bastok
  • Alliance Name:New Pacific Order

Posted 24 September 2009 - 05:49 PM

A quick glance at your signature convinced me there's no arguing you on this one.

#8 User is offline   mastab 

  • UNTRUST US
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 14,477
  • Joined: 03-September 07
  • Nation Name:Kaeva
  • Alliance Name:Gramlins

Posted 24 September 2009 - 05:51 PM

View Posthawk_11, on Sep 24 2009, 04:54 PM, said:

A quick glance at your signature convinced me there's no arguing you on this one.

You're posting to say that you're not going to contribute anything to the discussion?

#9 User is offline   western skier 

  • Just a amazing guy
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,058
  • Joined: 22-July 09
  • Nation Name:Mountain View
  • Alliance Name:The Order of Justice
  • CN:TE Nation Name:Mountain View

Posted 24 September 2009 - 05:53 PM

View Postmastab, on Sep 24 2009, 07:56 PM, said:

You're posting to say that you're not going to contribute anything to the discussion?



he's right, and a quick look at your political compass tells everything.

#10 User is offline   hawk_11 

  • Tech Miner
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,188
  • Joined: 14-June 07
  • Nation Name:Bastok
  • Alliance Name:New Pacific Order

Posted 24 September 2009 - 05:57 PM

View Postmastab, on Sep 24 2009, 07:56 PM, said:

You're posting to say that you're not going to contribute anything to the discussion?


Yes, actually I am. The idea that someone won't be able to get a permit through the proper methods merely because it is an anti-govenment message is laughable. At the risk of Godwinning this thread, the national socialists in this country fill out the proper paperwork and hold rallies yearly, and their message of white supremacy is definitely against our government's policies. What we have here is a protest that had plenty of time to fill out the proper paperwork, but didn't.

#11 User is offline   western skier 

  • Just a amazing guy
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,058
  • Joined: 22-July 09
  • Nation Name:Mountain View
  • Alliance Name:The Order of Justice
  • CN:TE Nation Name:Mountain View

Posted 24 September 2009 - 06:00 PM

The 1st amendent stats you can hold peaceful protests, this clearly was not a peaceful protest, thus it was illegal.

#12 User is offline   Loki Ire 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5,358
  • Joined: 28-November 07
  • Nation Name:Loki Imperium
  • Alliance Name:Ubercon

Posted 24 September 2009 - 06:03 PM

View Postmastab, on Sep 24 2009, 07:47 PM, said:

When there is no legal route to do what you have a right to do, acting outside of the law is acceptable.


Do you have evidence to support the idea that these individuals attempted to go about this legally but were denied? For instance, do you have evidence that they filed a permit request but were denied?

Or did they simply show up without even trying the legal route? Your argument's legitimacy would seem to depend on the extent to which they tried to comply with the law.

#13 User is offline   Dennis Von Bremen 

  • The German Turk Assasinator
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 12,717
  • Joined: 09-September 07
  • Nation Name:Bremer Reich

Posted 24 September 2009 - 06:20 PM

I think that they should have a right to peacefully protest wherever they want and whenever they want (to a degree, obviously they should not be allowed to block a road to a hospital or something like that). They did however go too far with the trash bins rolling and rock throwing. They need to keep it peaceful and maybe have sit-ins of some sort. If they do this then I don't see a reason to not allow them to stay. So long as they don't do anything violent to anyone they have done nothing wrong.

#14 User is offline   mastab 

  • UNTRUST US
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 14,477
  • Joined: 03-September 07
  • Nation Name:Kaeva
  • Alliance Name:Gramlins

Posted 24 September 2009 - 07:42 PM

View Postwestern skier, on Sep 24 2009, 04:58 PM, said:

he's right, and a quick look at your political compass tells everything.

If my compass were -2, 2 I would be no different. I would be just as capable of arguing and changing my mind. Coming to a different conclusion on how the world should and can be than you doesn't mean I'm using a different thought process. When's the last time something in the boiler room changed your mind anyway?

View Posthawk_11, on Sep 24 2009, 05:02 PM, said:

Yes, actually I am. The idea that someone won't be able to get a permit through the proper methods merely because it is an anti-govenment message is laughable. At the risk of Godwinning this thread, the national socialists in this country fill out the proper paperwork and hold rallies yearly, and their message of white supremacy is definitely against our government's policies. What we have here is a protest that had plenty of time to fill out the proper paperwork, but didn't.

Their message also can't be taken seriously, so they pose no threat to the government. Anarchism may not appeal to a lot of people, but anti-consumerism, anti-globalization, and many other movements publicized by these sorts of protests can. Besides, the national socialist protests are mild and regulated and not capable of attracting the attention that protests are supposed to.

View Postwestern skier, on Sep 24 2009, 05:05 PM, said:

The 1st amendent stats you can hold peaceful protests, this clearly was not a peaceful protest, thus it was illegal.

Funny, I could've sworn that the police attempted to stop it before there was any violence from the protesters.

View PostLoki Ire, on Sep 24 2009, 05:09 PM, said:

Do you have evidence to support the idea that these individuals attempted to go about this legally but were denied? For instance, do you have evidence that they filed a permit request but were denied?

Or did they simply show up without even trying the legal route? Your argument's legitimacy would seem to depend on the extent to which they tried to comply with the law.

Whether or not anyone tried doesn't matter when they wouldn't be able to get a permit (at least not for the sort of protest needed). Odds are that they would have been denied because of the security risk or treated like Code Pink and only allowed to protest in a way that fails to get attention for their cause.

View PostDennis Von Bremen, on Sep 24 2009, 05:26 PM, said:

I think that they should have a right to peacefully protest wherever they want and whenever they want (to a degree, obviously they should not be allowed to block a road to a hospital or something like that). They did however go too far with the trash bins rolling and rock throwing. They need to keep it peaceful and maybe have sit-ins of some sort. If they do this then I don't see a reason to not allow them to stay. So long as they don't do anything violent to anyone they have done nothing wrong.

The violence was in retaliation to police violence, from what I can see.

#15 User is offline   Loki Ire 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5,358
  • Joined: 28-November 07
  • Nation Name:Loki Imperium
  • Alliance Name:Ubercon

Posted 24 September 2009 - 08:39 PM

View Postmastab, on Sep 24 2009, 09:47 PM, said:

Whether or not anyone tried doesn't matter when they wouldn't be able to get a permit (at least not for the sort of protest needed). Odds are that they would have been denied because of the security risk or treated like Code Pink and only allowed to protest in a way that fails to get attention for their cause.


So they had no permits, didn't even try to apply for permits, got arrested for protesting without the permits they didn't even try to apply for, physically damaged public and private property while resisting arrest, and they're morally in the clear.

Yeah.

#16 User is offline   Arcturus Jefferson 

  • Tactineck
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 6,583
  • Joined: 10-September 07
  • Nation Name:Selukia
  • Alliance Name:Créole
  • CN:TE Nation Name:Hatorade
  • CN:TE Alliance Name:First Cajun Confederation

Posted 24 September 2009 - 08:58 PM

Everyone knows morality requires permits!

#17 User is offline   hawk_11 

  • Tech Miner
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,188
  • Joined: 14-June 07
  • Nation Name:Bastok
  • Alliance Name:New Pacific Order

Posted 24 September 2009 - 08:59 PM

View Postmastab, on Sep 24 2009, 09:47 PM, said:

Their message also can't be taken seriously-


Try again.

#18 User is offline   mastab 

  • UNTRUST US
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 14,477
  • Joined: 03-September 07
  • Nation Name:Kaeva
  • Alliance Name:Gramlins

Posted 24 September 2009 - 09:01 PM

View PostLoki Ire, on Sep 24 2009, 07:44 PM, said:

So they had no permits, didn't even try to apply for permits, got arrested for protesting without the permits they didn't even try to apply for, physically damaged public and private property while resisting arrest, and they're morally in the clear.

Yeah.

Yes. Illegal actions and violence can be used for good.

View Posthawk_11, on Sep 24 2009, 08:05 PM, said:

Try again.

No? They don't have to defend themselves against a nonexistent threat.

#19 User is offline   hawk_11 

  • Tech Miner
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,188
  • Joined: 14-June 07
  • Nation Name:Bastok
  • Alliance Name:New Pacific Order

Posted 24 September 2009 - 09:03 PM

View Postmastab, on Sep 24 2009, 11:06 PM, said:

No? They don't have to defend themselves against a nonexistent threat.


You're trying to tell me that a national socialist's view of white supremacy cannot be taken seriously, but an anarchist view of a world without borders and banks can be? There's centuries of racism in my favor and centuries of borders and banks against you with that kind of argument.

#20 User is offline   Arcturus Jefferson 

  • Tactineck
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 6,583
  • Joined: 10-September 07
  • Nation Name:Selukia
  • Alliance Name:Créole
  • CN:TE Nation Name:Hatorade
  • CN:TE Alliance Name:First Cajun Confederation

Posted 24 September 2009 - 09:08 PM

View Posthawk_11, on Sep 24 2009, 11:09 PM, said:

You're trying to tell me that a plantation owner's view of slavery cannot be taken seriously, but an abolitionist view of a world without slvary can be? There's centuries of racism in my favor and centuries of slavery against you with that kind of argument.

But of course that's silly since Americans still own slaves.

  • (4 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users