Discussions

Discussions » General Discussion

Anok

Violence at the RNC

Posted by Anok • 9/04/08 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: violence

I am following messages about the violence outside the RNC tonight, if you want to follow along, go to my blog, I am updating it every so many seconds.

If not, don't come.

SOMEONE should help get this info out, I haven't seen it on the news, but people are being gassed, and snow plowed out of the way, as the reports go.

User Comments

9/04/08

Shiley

That's very scary.

[reply]
9/04/08

howisbradley

If it's all happening, and I believe that's what you're hearing, then I don't get why the press isn't covering this. It doesn't make sense. It's certainly more newsworthy than what's going on inside the center.

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  Because they don't want people to know what's going on outside.
  
  Violence by the hands of police are rarely publicized, particularly not against the Bush - I mean McCain group.
2. 9/04/08
  
  howisbradley
  
  I don't know about that. Maybe Fox News, but not all the Networks. Rupert Murdoch doesn't know them all yet. I haven't met a single reporter who wouldn't jump all over a good story regardless of their beliefs.
9/04/08

harleyblues

what in the world why?
hb~

[reply]
9/04/08

Anok

www.startribune.com/politics/national/conventions/27869459.html?elr=KArksLc...

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  harleyblues
  
  Ok I'll take a peak-see
  hb~
2. 9/04/08
  
  howisbradley
  
  Glad to see it's finally made the press. This is a disaster.
9/04/08

Anok

Yup, and people MORE people are being detained and arrested as we speak, anyone left on the bridge. This is ridiculous, these are not ANarchist, from my understanding, but regular protesters, and journalists.

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  howisbradley
  
  It's the new America. We wave our flags and talk about freedoms while our freedoms crumble around us.
9/04/08

harleyblues

Wow, that is awful nothing wrong w/protesting the protestors were not violent from the peice..Damn police.... perhaps it should be sent to onliine news orgs..
hb~

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  Maybe I will!
9/04/08

Anok

Does anyone know how to submit news to news sites? I can't find the links.

[reply]
9/04/08

Anok

It looks like there will be mass arrests, Democracy now seems to be arrested too. (the producers, anyway.)

[reply]
9/04/08

harleyblues

Anok Im on MSNBC I posted a lil comment why isn't the news orgs speaking about this on the networks!!!!etc etc etc
HB~
still sluething

[reply]
9/04/08

Anok

There are videos UP! wcco.com/video/?id=47035@wcco.dayport.com

and audio:

www.utterz.com/u/utt/u-Nzk5NzI5Mg

Thanks HB.

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  harleyblues
  
  surely~
  hb~
2. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  Did you get any response, or was it a letter type of thing?
  
  I sent a letter into Washington Post about it. Saying I hoped they would be covering the violence and squashing of rights...
9/04/08

actionneeded

they just showed some protesters during the speech....what drama!

[reply]
9/04/08

harleyblues

See the protester while McCain is speaking!!!!!!! priceless
hb~

[reply]
9/04/08

Anok

Fox news article:

www.myfoxtwincities.com/myfox/pages/Home/Detail?contentId=7359660&version=3...

(Heh, their reporters got gassed )

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  howisbradley
  
  It'd be hypocritical for me to cheer that Fox News was gassed, but I must admit I got a chuckle.
2. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  I got a chuckle too, I couldn't help it
  
  They probably feel like "one of the good guys" now I never thought I'd say it though, Fox news was johnny on teh spot, and DIDN'T taint the report!
3. 9/04/08
  
  harleyblues
  
  lmao Johhny on the Spot..
  
  i'm still on msnbc asking the question why isn't the Protest being covered outside?
  hb~
4. 9/04/08
  
  csiunatc
  
  Minnesota Public Radio
  
  "Also on Wednesday, the Anti-War Committee pledged to go forward with a Thursday 5 p.m. march from the Capitol to the Xcel Energy Center, even though its permit will have expired by then."
  
  minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/09/03/rnc_night_3/
9/04/08

harleyblues

OMG so effin exciting!!! A protest during McCains acceptance speech oh my!!
hb~

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  I can't believe they got inside...oh, the police must have their tasers set to kill..
9/04/08

kristilinauer

Well, some of them deserve whatever came to them...like the ones who are inside making complete jackasses of themselves during McCains's speech. My goodness...do they not have even one ounce of decorum?

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  No, protesters who had a legal permit to protest do NOT deserve to be cornered and gassed.
  
  What the hell happened to freedom of speech?
2. 9/04/08
  
  howisbradley
  
  I never knew that freedom of speech required decorum.
3. 9/04/08
  
  kristilinauer
  
  Freedom of speech during John McCain's speech? Are you freakin' kidding me? You, and every Democrat here, would have had an absolute hayday tearing apart Republicans if someone had done that during Obama's speech.
4. 9/04/08
  
  MadameX
  
  "No, protesters who had a legal permit to protest do NOT deserve to be cornered and gassed."
  
  Anok, can you clarify this? The news story you linked to above seems to indicate that the permit expired, and that the protesters weren't stopped until after that time. Is that not accurate?
5. 9/04/08
  
  howisbradley
  
  I'm sorry, I missed that they were in the hall protesting. I'd actually get a laugh out of that regardless of who was speaking. I'd especially laugh at security. It reminds me of years ago when a friend and I casually walked into the DNC in Atlanta while a Senator, who did not have credentials, was being held outside.
  
  Funny or not, I agree it's out of hand if it's not outside.
6. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  Tiffany, they were leaving when they were told where they could march (to leave) and were then cornered, and gassed. edited - I have been following a real time description, and blogging it as it happened...
  
  Kristi - there were protesters at the DNC, not as many, and I blogged briefly about the violence towards them as well, although at that protest, they were violent as well.
  
  I support protesting.
7. 9/04/08
  
  csiunatc
  
  It expired at 6 according to the report i read earlier.
8. 9/04/08
  
  kristilinauer
  
  Protesting is fine. I've done it myself. But NOT INSIDE! That, in my mind, should be off limits, and I would seriously doubt the integrity...or the mental stability...of anyone who would go that far.
9. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  The tear gas, flash bombs, and riot equipment was used on protesters and journalists outside, earlier.
10. 9/04/08
  
  csiunatc
  
  Its basic security.
  
  A group like that, is too large and it is hard to search and secure it.
  In other words, it is a golden opportunity for someone with seriously ill intent to hide in the crowd wearing an explosive vest or similar.
  
  Protest all you want. Do it in accordance with the permits, and in a peaceful manner.
11. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  They were protesting peacefully.
  
  If you read the blow by blow that I took the time to post and update with every new report, you'd see that the protesters were obeying and complying with police, were non violent, and then cornered when they used SNOW PLOWS to disperse the crowd, by some reports, and gas, flash bombs, pepper spray, and police on horse back.
  
  Little overkill for non violent protesters and journalists, dont'chya think?
12. 9/04/08
  
  csiunatc
  
  Not at all,
  
  They are being told where not to go and they are not listening.
  
  Their permit expired hours ago.
  
  And we will see later how peaceful it was.
13. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  And you know this, how?
  
  My God, even Fox didn't insinuate the protesters were in the wrong. Here is a snippet from the live feed that I have been blogging:
  
  Police have barricaded protester sin, but insist they disperse.
  
  Protesters seem to be linking up together, matching the police's actions?
  
  This is happening near John Ireland Blvd(?) and 12th and cedar.
  
  Update, riot police have shown up at 12th and cedar, protesters asked to head north or "other measures will be used". Possible use of tear gas towards protesters at other end of barricaded bridge, Uptakers are pulling back, and press passes are no longer guarantee of safety, 20-30 reported arrests so far...
  
  police are preventing media from filing reports, leaving, mounted police have arrived,
  
  Protesters are trying to move down I-94, so far protesters have been peaceful, cops have not.
  
  Gas and concussion now being used. tear gas, and flash bombs are being used. Cop radio reports "We are not equipped o deal with the crowd"
  
  protesters are being surrounded near the Sears center, more flash bombs and gas is being used. Lots of undercover cops everywhere.
  
  One officer spotted with an M-16
  
  Clash on the university, smoke bombs being thrown at protesters, media.
  
  People screaming Where do we go? gas being thrown right at protesrers.
  
  Snow plows are clearing Marion
  
  Fire bombs!
  
  Firebombs! They grabbed me and said move!"
  
  hitting us over and over. Split us up firing flashbangs into other group
  
  A friend emails: "isn't using snowplows to block peaceful protesters the mn nice version of tiananmen square?"
  
  crowd mostly scattered. They are firing grenades at individuals
9/04/08

harleyblues

Ok its posted on one of the MSNBC's affilates website sites where I live now Im going too email them also!
hb~

[reply]
9/04/08

howisbradley

Someone remind me. Did Thoreau have an after hours permit?

[reply]
9/04/08

harleyblues

CNN is all over it!~

www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/04/rnc.protests/index.html?pc=kron

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  Thanks HB!
2. 9/04/08
  
  howisbradley
  
  Their video shows an orderly crowd. How dare those protesters get so out of hand.
9/04/08

kristilinauer

From the CNN article:

"Police used the gas when dozens of marchers -- most in their 20s, some chanting "F--- the police! F--- the police! F--- 'em!" -- tried to cross a bridge leading to the Xcel Center convention site after being warned not to."

You support THAT?? Wow, you and I couldn't be more different.

Yes, I support protests. But that is going too far. They got what they deserved, in my view.

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  Yeah, was that before or after the police rushed the crowd and sprayed them with gas?
  
  And no, they still have freedom of speech, They can't get arrested for dropping the F bomb.
  
  why not watch teh original video I linked up a above, and the audio about what was happening, as it was happening.
2. 9/04/08
  
  howisbradley
  
  I wholeheartedly support it. Shouting F-- the police! is a stupid method of protest, but I'm not here to judge what is ok or not ok to say as long as it's non-violent.
  
  Anyway, the video's I've seen show orderly crowds until the gas went off and then the swearing started. At least that's the way it appears to be reported.
  
  I'd be swearing if someone gassed me.
3. 9/04/08
  
  Anniepooh
  
  I guess, "Pooh, pooh on the police!" would have been more effective? Did you see the movie "Signs"? There was a part where Mel Gibson and Joaquin Phoenix's characters were trying to scare someone and they decided to race at whoever it was yelling curse words. They cursed for a REASON. The F-Bomb especially conotes anger and intimidation. I don't see how the use of it automatically made them candidates for gassing.
9/04/08

harleyblues

Kristi
what is so wrong with someone protesting during his speech? his entire platflorm is based around war, fear & more war, it speaks volumes forget the citizens of the USA.. lets blow everyone away? Now he says he hates war geeez~~~~
hb~

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  kristilinauer
  
  And the whole point of Obama's speech was based on half-baked truths (or, what I like to call LIES), but it would be completely inappropriate for someone to stand up during his speech and begin yelling and making a spectacle. Why? Because mature adults understand that, whether or not you agree with the candidates, these conventions are about THEM and their nominations, and their parties, and as Americans, we value the fact that people are allowed to have different viewpoints.
  
  If you feel that that behavior is appropriate just because you disagree with the candidate, I feel quite sorry for you.
2. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  People making disruptions at an event like that are escorted out.
  
  We aren't talking about that (OK, I'm not) I'm talking about the VIOLENCE happening outside the convention.
3. 9/04/08
  
  kristilinauer
  
  Anok, I understand that. HB, on the other hand, was evidently defending the behavior of the jackasses inside.
4. 9/04/08
  
  harleyblues
  
  Dont feel sorry for me~
  
  I believe in Freedom of Speech especially when someone is passionate about and issue and stand for what they believe in, who has the guts, balls and tenacity to take a stand... !~
  What half baked lies Obama talked about?
  
  I would have reacted the same way if someone protested at Obama's acceptance speech as well...
  
  One of my favorite personal things, I always say is this:
  
  "If you don't stand for something-you'll fall for anything"
  
  it's ok to take notes,
  hb~
5. 9/04/08
  
  kristilinauer
  
  "What half baked lies Obama talked about?"
  
  I'm not going to hijack this thread, but you can go here:
  www.blogcatalog.com/discuss/entry/sarah-pallin-vice-president#comment_56354...
9/04/08

csiunatc

Minnesota Public Radio

minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/09/03/rnc_night_3/

Also on Wednesday, the Anti-War Committee pledged to go forward with a Thursday 5 p.m. march from the Capitol to the Xcel Energy Center, even though its permit will have expired by then.

The Permit is Expired

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  howisbradley
  
  Yes, yes, their permit expired yet they continued. It is a protest afterall. And other than the expiration, all accounts so far seem to suggest it was peaceful.
2. 9/04/08
  
  Anniepooh
  
  I can't believe anyone would have to get a permit to protest! What's the point of that?
3. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  (From the article) "We're going to demand the police honor our rights to march and we'll see what they do," said organizer Jess Sundin.
  
  The police actually did allow them to march, according to the journalists and marchers who were there. There is an adiou clip ink above where you can hear about it, and,
  
  i want to say one more time. The police told protesters they could march. Then cornered them on the bridge. It was a direct lie.
  
  I'm not surprised. I just want it very clear to people. The cops said march, and then cornered everyone on the bridge.
4. 9/04/08
  
  howisbradley
  
  It baffles my mind as well.
5. 9/04/08
  
  csiunatc
  
  Well there you go,
  
  They continued, they did not listen to the warnings about crossing the bridge and kept trying.
  
  Tell me, what is the permit for ?
6. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  Annie, for a while now you've had to obtain permits, at first to hep avoid scheduling conflicts, and then to help keep protesters penned up in "free speech zones" which are located, generally far away from whatever it is you're protesting.
  
  it's freedom of speech in a cage, if you ask me.
  
  @Csiu What part of The police gave permission to march did you not understand?
7. 9/04/08
  
  csiunatc
  
  Show me?
  
  Where is it? Who gave the permission..
  
  Links?
8. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  There is a source link on my blog, at the beginning of the post.
  
  These were messages directly from the streets, in real time.
  
  Edit, THE POLICE gave permission.
9. 9/04/08
  
  Anniepooh
  
  @Anok, the whole permit thing seems rawther unconstitutional to me. Freedom is freedom - when did we put time and place constraints on it? "You may only exercise your right to free speech between the hours of 5 PM and 8 PM during months that end with an R, and in the white 'loading and unloading zone' only."
10. 9/04/08
  
  howisbradley
  
  You beat me too it Anniepooh, I was about to say nearly the same thing.
11. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  I totally agree with you, Annie. And while some have continually tried to fight it, they haven't gotten very far.
  
  In fact, things have become more strict. Including search and seizure of personal items before entering into your free speech cage.
  
  And they wonder why people are angry...
9/04/08

HaplessHermit

This is all wrong. If the policemen did anything, it was just to protect everybody. Only real bad people will get hurt and certainly no innocent people will be held overnight on some bs charge or no charge at all, that stuff only happens in unfree countries like Cuba and Venezuela. Don't you know anything?

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  Just checking here, that IS sarcasm....yes?
9/04/08

Anniepooh

I love the photojournalist arrested for doing her JOB. The 'tough guy face' was cracking me up. Only someone truly scared behaves that way.

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  clioandme
  
  That also happened to Democracy Now journalists earlier this week. markstoneman.wordpress.com/2008/09/02/amy-goodmans-arrest/
2. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  The Democracy now editors were arrested tonight, apparently.
3. 9/04/08
  
  clioandme
  
  Again? My blog post was from 9/2 and was about 9/1, when the videos were made.
4. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  Yeah, it seems they were also on the bridge and didn't check back in...so, probably arrested with everyone else.
9/04/08

clioandme

I am amazed at how lightly people will dismiss freedom of movement, personal liberty, the right to assemble, and so on, without knowing anything substantial about the circumstances—assuming that the police are right to stop protests and demonstrations preemptively and the protesters are wrong until proven innocent. How did we get to that point?

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  howisbradley
  
  Amen.
2. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  Sing it little red dog!
9/04/08

DrowseyMonkey

I'm watching MSNBC ... and Andrea Mitchell is being attacked by balloons, LOL. Too funny.

Anyway, to your point Anok ... it is very scary. I noticed them drag a few protesters out of the hall during McCain's speech ... but that's to be expected.

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  Yeah, I am surprised as well at the amount of violence that has taken place this week.
  
  There's something in the air....
2. 9/04/08
  
  clioandme
  
  @Drowsey: How about those virtual fireworks? Guess they wanted to imitate the Democrats and so used a Chinese tactic.
9/04/08

csiunatc

I looked through your page.

I can't find a link showing that the police gave permission.

I did a search on the page and cant find a match for "Permission"
Can you please find it for me?

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  The link says :SOURCE Are you really that thick?
  
  which leads you to the direct communications from people who were there tonight.
  
  Although I don't know why I'm bothering, I'm sure you'll take the reports from someone who wasn't there because they reported it the night before over the words of people who were there, and complying.
  
  I just got a message from someone who has been receiving phone calls from her son who is still stuck on the bridge, and she confirmed teh stories as well.
  
  I'm sure that hundreds of people are just dumb liars who deserve everything they got in your eyes.
  
  As per usual ::rolls eyes::
9/04/08

csiunatc

LMAO..

Your "source" is the incredibly reliable TWITTER.. From some unknown guy who labels himself Activist.

Alright.. Let me know when you have something real.

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  OK, I'll let you know. :rolls eyes:
  
  Go annoy someone else, will you?
9/04/08

HaplessHermit

What? Did they arrest Amy Goodman again? They shouldn't have let her out to begin with. She just reeks of danger and violence. Just look at her imposing figure, she is soooo threatening and scary, the cops have to defend themselves. The other day, I saw Goodman actually attack an officer (when I say attacked, I mean ask where she could walk)

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  No, from what I understand, it was the editors, or producers that got stuck on the bridge.
9/04/08

csiunatc

If they indeed have permission to march, there is a problem.

Then again, if the police GAVE the permission, and that is their reason for being allowed, wouldn't it stand to reason that the police can end that permission too?

For instance before they cross the bridge?

[reply]
9/04/08

cooper

I haven't read the thread but did you check indy media minneappolis or the Uptake they usually have it all.
twincities.indymedia.org/

theuptake.org/

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  The uptake is one of the groups that was there is numbers...
9/04/08

harleyblues

yikes off comment, they had the nerve to interview Former Gov. Pete Wilson?
hb~

[reply]
9/04/08

csiunatc

According to hold on .. An actual NAMED source from the AWC, they didn't have permission to march.

"The important thing is even though we didn't have a permit to march, people have decided they want to keep protesting despite all these riot police," said Meredith Aby, a member of the Anti-War Committee."

www.kare11.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=523952&catid=2

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  Anniepooh
  
  I think the bigger point is that anyone needs permission.
2. 9/04/08
  
  howisbradley
  
  It's a point he ain't getting, Annie.
3. 9/04/08
  
  Anniepooh
  
  Until he needs to utilize it for himself. It's always that way, isn't it?
4. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  Right, then how did they end up on the bridge, and why did all of the people there state they were told to go that way?
  
  What, did they force their way through the riot police?
  
  They didn't have a PERMIT to march over the bridge but word on the street is that the police allowed them to go. Then they were cornered.
  
  And what about the people who were trying to leave, but were barricaded in?
  
  I suppose they broke the law too, right?
  
  Doesn't matter, you wouldn't believe any of it anyway.
9/04/08

lot2learn

This information is coming from someone who is not even there, on Anok's blog, he posted " I'm just putting in reports, none of this is me, this is all people on the ground " How are people that are getting gassed and firebombed, and beaten reporting all this ? The video that was posted seemed to be happening in the daylight, so I'm not sure about that either.

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  howisbradley
  
  Currently sunset in the twin cities area is around 7:45 pm.
2. 9/04/08
  
  clioandme
  
  If he wasn't there, the reports, the individual tweets, are from people who were there and with whom he was in communication via twitter and cell phones. You had a kind of command and control view if you read carefully. Still, we don't know enough to draw firm conclusions. But we do know enough to ask important questions.
3. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  There are these devices called cell phones, and Blackberries, and Iphones.
  
  You can tweet from them, which, is where the information came from.
4. 9/04/08
  
  clioandme
  
  By the way, some of those tweets are deliberately cryptic, since its communication out in the open, meaning a channel the police could read if they do Web 2.0. But you can also see enough to conclude there were probably no ulterior motives. They seem to have just been well organized, assertive, and responsive to police actions.
9/04/08

clioandme

Permission was part of the issue. An expiration of permission does not automatically justify the kind of tactics that seem to have been involved. This brings me back to my question above: www.blogcatalog.com/discuss/entry/violence-at-the-rnc#comment_563681

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  I agree, I mean, snow plows? Flash bombs? Tear gas?
  
  No wonder there was chaos.
2. 9/04/08
  
  csiunatc
  
  Not at all..
  
  A single nut. doesn't have to be part of the group at all..
  
  It's pretty easy to infiltrate a group and pretend to be one of them. Especially one that covers their faces.
3. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  Yes, there might be one nutter, so let's gas ALL of them!
  
  When did this mentality become so pervasive?
4. 9/04/08
  
  clioandme
  
  Exactly Anok. This brings me back to my first question : www.blogcatalog.com/discuss/entry/violence-at-the-rnc#comment_563681
5. 9/04/08
  
  csiunatc
  
  I'd say 9/11 upped the stakes more than a little.
  
  Whats your idea?
  
  Drop all security around the nominees until some half-drunk nazi yahoo shoots Obama. THEN allow them to secure it?
6. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  *Shaking my head*
  
  You do realize there is such a thing as security measures, without violence towards people who have not shown a propensity for violence during said march, don't you?
  
  Do you not understand that it is NOT OK to throw tear gas, flash bombs, etc at a group of people peacefully gathered (and not within range of the candidate) because they think there might be someone in teh crowd who is crazy, but no actually proof of such claim?
  
  Do you not understand that security measures don't have to react violently to people who aren't doing anything? And furthermore that preemptive violence is a really stupid way to "control a crowd" in case there is taht one crazy person?
7. 9/05/08
  
  clioandme
  
  @csiunatc: Bringing 9/11 into it conflates terrorists with demonstrators. That's quite an intellectual feat. Unfortunately, this isn't the first time I've heard that logic. If I follow it further, legitimate political opposition becomes an act of treason and we have no more democracy worthy of that name. That rhetoric was really strong after 9/11 among some Bush administration officials, Republican politicians, and the public at large, but I believe we've got away from that. Saving ourselves from terrorists by destroying our democracy (which is what trampling on the Constitution and individual liberties protected therein amounts to)? I don't think so.
9/04/08

csiunatc

Well, that may be.

The big point to me, is what i said earlier in this thread.

You can't allow an uncontrolled group like this get too close to a golden target for nutcases and terrorists.

If it is uncontrollable, it is too easy to have one person who is not interested in protesting, but interested in doing harm such as bombing.

They can protest all they want, but there has to be a security zone around targets like this.

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  "uncontrollable crowd"
  
  What uncontrollable crowd? From your own links it states that they were NON VIOLENT and generally just singing, or sitting there. Some people did cartwheels.
  
  Woah!
2. 9/04/08
  
  Anniepooh
  
  It's exactly the response the police had that causes the chaos! It may well have been controlled, but the "one person who is not interested in protesting, but interested in doing harm such as bombing" goes both ways. I've seen cops get scared and overreact before, and it only takes one to set it all off.
  
  My husband is former USMC and told me about stories like that all the time. One soldier got nervous and *kablam* everything went to scheit.
3. 9/04/08
  
  Anniepooh
  
  @Anok -- that video shows people waving through the gas - not yelling or screaming or rushing at the police, waving.
4. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  Yup, Annie, most of the people according to their communications, were trying to find the way OUT, and were blocked at every exit, essentially.
5. 9/04/08
  
  kristilinauer
  
  Seems logical to me, csiunatc.
  
  "Police said they successfully disrupted anarchists who wanted to throw Molotov cocktails, interfere with delegates and generally cause mayhem. "
  
  From the article you cited above.
6. 9/04/08
  
  csiunatc
  
  Uncontrollable as in they are too many, moving without ability to stop them.
  
  Not that they are out of control, but that they are a mass of people that are moving without the ability to control them in case one person wants to do something crazy.
  
  You can't search every person in a protest march, or their bags, etc. So you cannot control what they are carrying..
  
  In other words. 10000 peaceful protesters and one idiot with an explosive vest. The risk of the latter means you can't let them approach targets like that.
7. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  Yeah, the same "anarchists" whose house they raided and found...nothing?
  
  That was already reported, a preemptive raid was done with a warrant, and nothing was found on the people, or premesis.
  
  The people in this march were not Anarchists (I don't think there was even one) or journalists with press passes.
  
  @Csiu - they weren't moving, apparently, but sitting there, and no one had a bomb.
  
  I any case, gassing people who MIGHT have explosives sounds like a really bad idea anyway.
  
  Let's make it more chaotic, by sending everyone who was peacefully assembled into a total panic!
8. 9/04/08
  
  Anniepooh
  
  Think of it this way, that "uncontrollable crowd" is a part of the very people that hold the power to make or break a president. These candidates need to wise up and pay attention. This is America - they aren't on foreign soil. To act as if these people have no right to voice their opinion and to treat them as less-than, ignorant or unintelligent is just plain wrong.
  
  People are getting tired of the upper class being the only voice of this nation.
9/04/08

lot2learn

Sunset at 7:45. HMMM that clears things a little. I have looked everywhere on the TV for someone reporting it

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  It's too soon, I think. Right now it's all internet. However there are several links to news sources and videos in this thread.
9/04/08

voodooKobra

I saw people being dragged out against their will. Man, what a bunch of wimps. I would've thrown the security guards INTO John McCain.

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  Anniepooh
  
  Now THAT would be good TV.
9/04/08

lot2learn

I just saw a very brief comment about the disturbance outside of the RNC on CSPAN. No video, but she did say there had been some violence

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  Totally off topic, but every time I look at your avatar quickly, It looks like a whale to me (the hat part, mainly)
9/04/08

clioandme

Personally, I know of heavy-handed tactics in DC from several years ago. The charges they made against protesters were thrown out of court. And maybe the police didn't care so much about that. Maybe it was just a way to get people off the streets during a World Bank meeting. In this case it was a bunch of cyclists protesting for the environment. Police directed them into a park. Then surrounded and arrested them, instead of giving them the option to disperse. That seemed like preemption too.

But I don't know much about this. And I think that's a problem. It would be nice to see more reporting on the issue. Dont see myself having enough time to do the research anytime soon, but I would appreciate any information on what kinds of policies are actually being followed and why, should anyone run across that kind of thing.

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  It happens more often than you would think, Mark.
  
  False allegations, not being allowed to do as you are asked, and preemptive "crowd control" has become more the norm lately.
  
  Also, a new disturbing trend, people with cameras are often harshly, or brutally confronted by the police until they turn the device off, so that no video is recorded after some time.
  
  At the protest in DC last September, One of Kokesh's friends/IVAW members managed to get some good photos after they had been arrested because she snuck her camera phone out of her pocket without the police realizing it.
2. 9/04/08
  
  jan4insight
  
  Mark, on DemocracyNow.org this week, there are some interviews with legal observers at the RNC protests. There's a lot of evidence that orders for the local police to act this way are coming from the FBI - maybe higher.
  
  Folks, this is a forerunner of what "4 more years" of Repug-rule would do to us: America, a police state all the way.
3. 9/04/08
  
  clioandme
  
  My gut wants to agree with you, Jan, but police tactics have been a problem in DC, a city run by Democrats. In other words, this seems to be more about policing than politics.
  
  Course, DC has various types of federal police too, but usually it's the regular, competent metropolitan police involved in this kind of stuff, and they're under the control of a Democratic administration.
4. 9/05/08
  
  jan4insight
  
  @ Mark, while it's a complex situation, keep in mind there were protests at the Democratic convention but not with this level of police activity or violence.
5. 9/05/08
  
  kristilinauer
  
  "his is a forerunner of what "4 more years" of Repug-rule would do to us: America, a police state all the way."
  
  Wow, and we Republicans get accused of using scare tactics and fear-mongering. What a load of crap!
6. 9/05/08
  
  clioandme
  
  Maybe Kristi. Course, the Bush administration has a pretty clear record of undermining individual liberties in the name of national security.
9/04/08

jan4insight

Read your blog, Anok. I really feel for the people who were caught in this. Also, I just talked to friend in California who said she had been hearing about tonight's RNC violence on the radio. So it is being reported, though I don't know by what channel.

This is reminding me of my days in Berkeley in the late 60s (only worse). It was suspected then, and confirmed years later after many FOIA requests, that the "violent" protesters were actually agents provocateurs from the CIA and/or FBI - paid thugs hired to incite violence to either enable these arrests, or to turn public opinion against the peace movement. While I don't know if that's going on here, it sure makes me wonder.

[reply]
1. 9/04/08
  
  Anok
  
  Yup, I think history will repeat itself, or atthe very least, revisit itself for old times sake.
  
  Protests will be abundant I'm thinking.
9/04/08

whatweneed33

I heard about some of the protesting and violence from last night on today's Air America radio broadcasts, but they were talking mostly about how the mainstream media wasn't covering it. Interesting. Will have to go check out your links.

[reply]
9/05/08

Anok

Update:

blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/09/police-arrest-a.html

Approximately three-hundred protesters were held on the bridge for nearly an hour over Interstate 94 in St. Paul. After hours of people protesting, police instructed demonstrators to file onto the bridge and then announced everyone would be arrested, refusing to allow anyone off the overpass. Law enforcement barricading the bridge fired pepper spray, instructing protesters to put their hands behind their heads.

ABC News' Jennifer Duck was trapped with the marchers on the bridge and observed many young children scared and crying. She spoke to several marchers who said they wanted to go home, but the police refused to allow any movement. Members of the media, and many trying to follow police direction were being pepper sprayed in the face.

[reply]
1. 9/05/08
  
  Shiley
  
  Children? Now this is going too far. Maybe it's time to petition to have our first amendment rights returned and our right to peaceable assembly.
2. 9/05/08
  
  Anok
  
  I've been one to believe that children should not be present at protests, mainly because violence can break out.
  
  However, if police didn't often times incite the violence themselves, it would be safer for peaceful protests, and children.
3. 9/05/08
  
  clioandme
  
  That is what happened to those cyclists in DC back in 2001 or 2002. (Can't remember exactly.) Directed into a park, then told they would be arrested.
4. 9/05/08
  
  RTBjr73
  
  I agree with you Anok, Kids do not need to be at protests. That's irresponsable on the parents.
5. 9/05/08
  
  clioandme
  
  Since when aren't kids allowed to be at peaceful marches? How are they supposed to learn civic responsibilities? Of course, if you suspect violence will be involved, that's another matter. But if you believe you're living in a democracy with law-abiding citizens and police who protect such citizens, then why not?
6. 9/05/08
  
  Shiley
  
  You're right children shouldn't be there but we have a constutional right to freedom of speech and freedom to peaceably assemble.
7. 9/05/08
  
  RTBjr73
  
  @markstoneman - You hit the nail right on the head..."if you suspect violence".
  
  It all comes down to common sense. Is it really worth the risk? Not with my children. And as far as kids learning about civic responsibilities, then my children can start learning by volunteering in a positive way, such as neighborhood beatification projects or at projects that promote fun with civic responsibilities.
8. 9/05/08
  
  dlowe
  
  Yeah, bringing kids to a protest is just wrong. I have been a part of a lot of demonstrations and barring police violence, there always seems to be some moron present starting trouble.
  
  I was in Pershing square in the 90's during a labor protest when I saw people just start throwing bottles and running FOR NO REASON! The feeling was actually fun until that happened. Kids were crying and stuff. it really sucked.
  
  "then my children can start learning by volunteering in a positive way, such as neighborhood beatification projects or at projects that promote fun with civic responsibilities."
  
  Much better idea
9. 9/05/08
  
  Anok
  
  Mark, I don't think anyone is saying you can't bring kids, as in, they should be exposed to certain legal rights and methods of democracy - just that in today's political climate, it isn't wise.
  
  I've been to a few protests that were quite peaceful, but you never know.
10. 9/06/08
  
  clioandme
  
  @RTBjr73: Your phrasing "in a positive way" suggests that you think peaceful demonstrations are not positive. That's a problematic characterization of citizens making their voices heard.
9/05/08

bladeaxe4

well, Google out and there's a lot of stuff that reports on it now !

www.google.com/custom?domains=weindex.blogspot.com&q=Violence+at+the+RNC&si...

[reply]
9/05/08

Shiley

Ok, on my site I am going to start petitioning spread word

mythoughts-ssb.blogspot.com/2008/09/my-thought-violation-of-constitutional....

[reply]
1. 9/05/08
  
  Anok
  
  Shirley, there is also a vigil of some sort being held, I think to raise money for those arrested? I don't know if it was a spur of the moment thing, but it's worth a look: (from last night)
  
  jail vigil will need many more bodies, especially considering tonight's police terror. stand up for friends now! rncjailvigil@riseup.net
9/06/08

harleyblues

there was a lil snippet of protesting on my local news but they did not show the violence but there were alot of people marching from the clip
hb~

[reply]
9/06/08

ruth2008

The more publicity they get, the happier some of them are. Most of them are well meaning protesters. But sadly they are exploted by the few fanatics who run the show. These few are eager to to provoke the police. It's an old story. The subsequent publicity show poor little defenseless protesters in confrontation with the police, achieving exactly the goals, one of them being bad publicity for the police.

[reply]
9/06/08

gingerbeer25

I have no doubt that the police used excessive force, even before the convention started they were doing searches on peoples homes based on trumped up charges.

www.womanist-musings.com/2008/08/rnc-raids-police-violate-rights.html

[reply]
9/06/08

HaplessHermit

Interesting interview I saw where Amy Goodman asked one of the top police officials what their position was on the marchs/protests. The response was something like "Well, we have inteeligence that some troublemakers and undesirables might be here....." Then Goodman asked him, "What are some of your methods? Infiltration?" and he responded "Yes."

This is very disturbing. Are you people familiar with the co-intel programs of the 60's and the abuse of power which came from it? People say well that was the 60's and a Nixon reaction and all that but just look at the situation now.

If you are not familar on how co-intel works, well the FBI or other agency plants operatives on peaceful but loud dissidents. Then the operative, once associated with the group, would act out violently, then this will give the autorities a cause to come down and take down the group and at least villify them. Therefore official reasons could be given to deny pemits etc. This stuff has been well documented. People usually say "oh but that was only under orders of crazy Nixon" or something. Well, it goes on today and is accepted.

We in America boast of out many rights like "freedom of assembly" and at the same time arrest people for "illegal assembly"

[reply]
9/06/08

csiunatc

Does it? can you show me proof of violent protestors that were in fact infiltrators in Denver or St. Paul.

Infiltration can also be used just to gather information. Which in many cases is much more effective.

This is police work, which in my book makes it undercover police work. Informants and undercover police have always been one of the best ways to locate and capture criminals.

I think removing the criminals from the peaceful protesters should be a good thing.

[reply]
9/06/08

HaplessHermit

"Infiltration can also be used just to gather information. Which in many cases is much more effective."

Depends what is meant by 'effective'. If you mean taking down people that have a legal right to voice their opionion, then yeah it effective.

-------------------------

"I think removing the criminals from the peaceful protesters should be a good thing."

It would be rather naive to believe that the goal is to capture criminals. This is political. The ultimate goal is to dissuade people from protesting at all.

BTW, about infiltration, there is lots of info now about how excessively the FBI and other law enforcement agencies used it in the past. If in most cases, these tactics were used in a way to undermine peaceful movements, why would someone assume it would be different today?

Also, I've seen the footage on Democracy Now of mild mannerd mild-aged woman, reporter Amy Goodman just approach an officer and ask "Why is my producer being arrested?" and in response, he manhandled her, twisted her arm, dragged her and arrested her.

You obviously aren't familar with the history of monitoring and dismantling "subversive" groups in this country. You also haven't seen the footage of innocent people getting beat for no reason. I wonder how you would feel if you were marching, then barricades were set up on all sides of you and then you were told to disperse, but there was nowhere to go (this is a common tactic) and you had to spend a night in jail for that.

I'm sorry to burst your bubble that police = good and bad=criminals.

[reply]

« back to discussions

Add Your Comment

Login to leave a message.

Recent Readers
Related Discussions
- DO YOU THINK FRIENDLY FIRE HELPED INJURE…
  0 replies • 11/06/09
- Not the Kind of Thing I'd Usually Share…
  12 replies • 10/16/09
- Against gender violence
  0 replies • 9/30/09
- SEX, VIOLENCE & THE GRIDIRON BOYS
  1 reply • 7/16/09
- Man Against Woman
  19 replies • 5/13/09

Discussion Search
Subscribe via Email