the right of the people peaceably to assembleremember that the operative word here is PEACEABLY...
Posted on 08/27/2004 4:22:08 PM PDT by Mopey
Edited on 08/27/2004 4:49:14 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
As the New York Times has reported, in an October 2003 memorandum to law enforcement agencies, the FBI expressed concern over the that marches and rallies in Washington might become "violent, destructive, or disruptive."
In the memo, law enforcement agencies at all levels of government are warned to be aware of "possible indicators of protest activity."
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Moby?
Has CNN ever suggested that threatening book publishers and retailers to keep a book from being sold has a 'chilling' effect on free speech?
Note the word peacably. There is no right to riot. If Mr. Barr thinks there are no protestors planning to assemble violently, I respectfully suggest he has lost his marbles.
Welcome to the Free Republic.
Mr. Barr obviously has never visited an Indymedia.
I'm all for the right to protest, but I'm damned if I'll turn my back on Leftists, and no sane person would if they ever read those sites.
Welcome to FR.
Odd that you mention the Feebers.
The Dems have abridged my free speech for years.
They call intolerance tolerance, and free speech 'hate' when anyone but a Democrat practices their rights.
And, having the right to say anything doesn't guarantee anyone the right to be heard.
the right of the people peaceably to assembleremember that the operative word here is PEACEABLY...
There's really nothing like idiot liberals spewing their linguistic programming, is there?
bump!
See McCain-Feingold.
Jimmy Carter's answer to chilly? "put on a sweata lak muh."
Signed up yesterday, two whole posts, and BOTH of them are forming a pretty impressive track record so far.
Together they look, well.. like troll-kin talk.
McCain-Feingold was a bigger crush to free speech than what Feebers do at any given time.
Besides, they've got alot of Clinton history to get rid of.
You know, the ugly shaky lesbian named Janet Reno compromising their operations, Jamie GORElick erecting a wall between intelligence agencies..
Yeah, that can be tough to handle free speech wise.
On the violence of propertyOne of their after-mayhem reports:
We contend that property destruction is not a violent activity unless it destroys lives or causes pain in the process. By this definition, private property--especially corporate private property--is itself infinitely more violent than any action taken against it. Private property should be distinguished from personal property. The latter is based upon use while the former is based upon trade. The premise of personal property is that each of us has what s/he needs. The premise of private property is that each of us has something that someone else needs or wants.
In a society based on private property rights, those who are able to accrue more of what others need or want have greater power. By extension, they wield greater control over what others perceive as needs and desires, usually in the interest of increasing profit to themselves.Advocates of "free trade" would like to see this process to its logical conclusion: a network of a few industry monopolists with ultimate control over the lives of the everyone else. Advocates of "fair trade" would like to see this process mitigated by government regulations meant to superficially impose basic humanitarian standards.
As anarchists, we despise both positions. Private property--and capitalism, by extension--is intrinsically violent and repressive and cannot be reformed or mitigated. Whether the power of everyone is concentrated into the hands of a few corporate heads or diverted into a regulatory apparatus charged with mitigating the disasters of the latter, no one can be as free or as powerful as they could be in a non-hierarchical society. When we smash a window, we aim to destroy the thin veneer of legitimacy that surrounds private property rights. At the same time, we exorcise that set of violent and destructive social relationships which has been imbued in almost everything around us.
By "destroying" private property, we convert its limited exchange value into an expanded use value. A storefront window becomes a vent to let some fresh air into the oppressive atmosphere of a retail outlet (at least until the police decide to tear-gas a nearby road blockade). A newspaper box becomes a tool for creating such vents or a small blockade for the reclamation of public space or an object to improve one's vantage point by standing on it. A dumpster becomes an obstruction to a phalanx of rioting cops and a source of heat and light. A building facade becomes a message board to record brainstorm ideas for a better world. After N30, many people will never see a shop window or a hammer the same way again. The potential uses of an entire cityscape have increased a thousand-fold. The number of broken windows pales in comparison to the number broken spells--spells cast by a corporate hegemony to lull us into forgetfulness of all the violence committed in the name of private property rights and of all the potential of a society without them. Broken windows can be boarded up (with yet more waste of our forests) and eventually replaced, but the shattering of assumptions will hopefully persist for some time to come.
On November 30, several groups of individuals in black bloc attacked various corporate targets in downtown Seattle. Among them were (to name just a few):
Fidelity Investment (major investor in Occidental Petroleum, the bane of the U'wa tribe in Columbia) Bank of America, US Bancorp, Key Bank and Washington Mutual Bank (financial institutions key in the expansion of corporate repression) Old Navy, Banana Republic and the GAP (as Fisher family businesses, rapers of Northwest forest lands and sweatshop laborers) NikeTown and Levi's (whose overpriced products are made in sweatshops) McDonald's (slave-wage fast-food peddlers responsible for destruction of tropical rainforests for grazing land and slaughter of animals) Starbucks(peddlers of an addictive substance whose products are harvested at below-poverty wages by farmers who are forced to destroy their own forests in the process) Warner Bros. (media monopolists) Planet Hollywood (for being Planet Hollywood)
This activity lasted for over 5 hours and involved the breaking of storefront windows and doors and defacing of facades. Slingshots, newspaper boxes, sledge hammers, mallets, crowbars and nail-pullers were used to strategically destroy corporate property and gain access (one of the three targeted Starbucks and Niketown were looted). Eggs filled with glass etching solution, paint-balls and spray-paint were also used.
The black bloc was a loosely organized cluster of affinity groups and individuals who roamed around downtown, pulled this way by a vulnerable and significant storefront and that way by the sight of a police formation. Unlike the vast majority of activists who were pepper-sprayed, tear-gassed and shot at with rubber bullets on several occasions, most of our section of the black bloc escaped serious injury by remaining constantly in motion and avoiding engagement with the police. We buddied up, kept tight and watched each others' backs. Those attacked by federal thugs were un-arrested by quick-thinking and organized members of the black bloc. The sense of solidarity was awe-inspiring.
You don't think the FBI should be concerned? Are you aware that 40 or so of the most notorious and violent Anarchists are already on the job in NY?
-- Declaration of Independence
'Happiness' includes the right to own and protect private property.
OK. Let's say it's YOU who have a president to protect, a political convention full of pubbies to take care of, and a mob of leftists in the streets.
What's your plan?
Therein lies the fallacy of their thinking. Private property IS personal property. Someone, or many, have invested their personal labor to purchase it. To destroy that property is to steal someone's labor. To steal someone's labor is to make them unhappy. To make someone unhappy is a violation of human rights. Penalties are attached to violating human rights.
I know that explaining this simple fact is a waste of time to anarchists, as they already know this and are willing to suffer the consequences.
The consequences must be severe enough to discourage anarchists. Anarchists lose their rights the moment they infringe on another's.
Suggest they carry medical kits and next-of-kin labels.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.