WTO, seatttle, and the National Guard #2
- Thread starter Dennis
- Start date
Any time any innocent person's inalienable rights are interfered with by agents of the state, an unconstitutional act has occurred.
Curfews? Kiss my heinie, now you're punishing everyone because of the actions of a few. Dennis is right, it is no different than gun control. If somebody is looting or vandalizing, then arrest them for looting or vandalizing and leave everyone else alone.
It's pretty hard to aim tear gas and pepper spray at individuals in a crowd, so you have to suspect that more than one peaceful demonstrator lost some of their civil liberties in the "crowd control". There's a popular Franklin quote that applies here.
Sure, some LEOs present helped injured people and did their utmost to preserve the peace as well as everyone's rights. These officers need to be mentioned, but really, that is precisely their job. Other LEOs were kicking and striking people who were lying on the ground in the fetal position; I've seen footage of it. Perhaps this person was previously engaged in vandalism or looting or even violence, it does not give the LEO in question the right to kick them when they're down and out. Arrest them and take them away if they're so bad.
It doesn't matter if you agree with the protesters or not (for the most part, I don't, FWIW) what matters is your rights are being infringed whenever Rainbow Pierced-brow's are. If someone was peacably protesting, and there were many, and they were forced to stop by agents of the state, and that happened, then we all lost a measure of freedom. And we did.
BTW, not all anarchists are leftists, nor are they all fans of lawless chaos. Many, if not most, simply believe that they can run their own lives without the help or permission of the government.
------------------
"In many ways we are treated quite like men." Erich Maria Remarque
Curfews? Kiss my heinie, now you're punishing everyone because of the actions of a few. Dennis is right, it is no different than gun control. If somebody is looting or vandalizing, then arrest them for looting or vandalizing and leave everyone else alone.
It's pretty hard to aim tear gas and pepper spray at individuals in a crowd, so you have to suspect that more than one peaceful demonstrator lost some of their civil liberties in the "crowd control". There's a popular Franklin quote that applies here.
Sure, some LEOs present helped injured people and did their utmost to preserve the peace as well as everyone's rights. These officers need to be mentioned, but really, that is precisely their job. Other LEOs were kicking and striking people who were lying on the ground in the fetal position; I've seen footage of it. Perhaps this person was previously engaged in vandalism or looting or even violence, it does not give the LEO in question the right to kick them when they're down and out. Arrest them and take them away if they're so bad.
It doesn't matter if you agree with the protesters or not (for the most part, I don't, FWIW) what matters is your rights are being infringed whenever Rainbow Pierced-brow's are. If someone was peacably protesting, and there were many, and they were forced to stop by agents of the state, and that happened, then we all lost a measure of freedom. And we did.
BTW, not all anarchists are leftists, nor are they all fans of lawless chaos. Many, if not most, simply believe that they can run their own lives without the help or permission of the government.
------------------
"In many ways we are treated quite like men." Erich Maria Remarque
cdf, I have to disagree with you on the WTO. the US is right now signing treatys that take away the sovereignties of all nations that sign them, and replace home rule with the rule of unelected officials.
See the Kyoto accords. While we haven't signed this particular treaty, yet, It's not long in comming.
------------------
jones
See the Kyoto accords. While we haven't signed this particular treaty, yet, It's not long in comming.
------------------
jones
Remember when this stuff used to come in on the news from "socialist" europe? This ain't the isolated american "protests" of the 60's we america came to know. It is the current form of democracy in socialist countries that has come to roost permanantly here. It is the future here and it is potentially violent due to the immoral guarantees we have made to people that they are owed something for nothing.
rabbit assassin
Moderator
I have to congratulate your police on a fine effort.
There is nothing wrong with peaceful protests but if some protester thinks they have right to sit down and stop others going about their lawful business well they deserve a good kicking.
A couple of years ago we had big protests at parliament house in Canberra, the police were weak as usual and the unionists smashed the side doors and trashed a gift stop and would have gone further but more locked doors stopped them.
Would you let that happen at the white house ?
Also we had the wharf workers protests a year or so ago, the union thugs won again by sitting in fron of the gates and unlawfully stopping contactors and truck drivers entering - our gutless police again let them do it.
If you are weak with protesters like them they will get what they wan't and continue doing it.
There is nothing wrong with protesting, I've been to 2 big gun ralies in Sydney but just because you cry freedom of speech, the right to protest doesn't mean you can trample other peoples rights to get your way.
We have greenies stopping logging in forrest which costs thousands of dollars to small town logging companies - the police just let them go too.
Send some of those cops here, we need them.
There is nothing wrong with peaceful protests but if some protester thinks they have right to sit down and stop others going about their lawful business well they deserve a good kicking.
A couple of years ago we had big protests at parliament house in Canberra, the police were weak as usual and the unionists smashed the side doors and trashed a gift stop and would have gone further but more locked doors stopped them.
Would you let that happen at the white house ?
Also we had the wharf workers protests a year or so ago, the union thugs won again by sitting in fron of the gates and unlawfully stopping contactors and truck drivers entering - our gutless police again let them do it.
If you are weak with protesters like them they will get what they wan't and continue doing it.
There is nothing wrong with protesting, I've been to 2 big gun ralies in Sydney but just because you cry freedom of speech, the right to protest doesn't mean you can trample other peoples rights to get your way.
We have greenies stopping logging in forrest which costs thousands of dollars to small town logging companies - the police just let them go too.
Send some of those cops here, we need them.
Anyone see the footage of the lone LEO in full body armor and mask chasing the lone civilian half his size down the sidewalk, kicking him repeatedly and then shooting him at point blank range with a 12 gauge bean bag round as he pleaded for mercy?
What a fine public servant. And they wonder why they are disliked.
I realize he is only on man, but why didn't other LAW ENFORCeMENT officers arrest him? Or at the very least intervene?
This footage was long enough to establish the protester posed no threat to anyone and was only interested in getting away from the large armed man in armor who was beating him.
I don't care if he was throwing firebombs 5 minutes earlier, he was well under control during the whole video.
That cop was only interested in doing the most damage to him possible.
Call me an LEO basher, whatever. I am in law enforcement, as was my father.
What a fine public servant. And they wonder why they are disliked.
I realize he is only on man, but why didn't other LAW ENFORCeMENT officers arrest him? Or at the very least intervene?
This footage was long enough to establish the protester posed no threat to anyone and was only interested in getting away from the large armed man in armor who was beating him.
I don't care if he was throwing firebombs 5 minutes earlier, he was well under control during the whole video.
That cop was only interested in doing the most damage to him possible.
Call me an LEO basher, whatever. I am in law enforcement, as was my father.
Jones, you could very well be correct about WTO. I'm still leaning toward their side in opposition of our officialy socialist governments. Of cource your aprehension is well founded. I'll probably be quite dissapointed in WTO activities.
Dittos to RabbitAssasin. I'm a hardliner when comes to civil unrest. I have a morbid fear of anarchy.
DaveAA, do you have any links to that footage? I havn't seen it yet. If that actualy occured than that officer was in violation of procedure. Beanbag rounds aren't to be used at extremely close ranges. But then again, we don't know what happened just before. Who knows what the long-hair did? But nonetheless, the officer should have known better.
Dittos to RabbitAssasin. I'm a hardliner when comes to civil unrest. I have a morbid fear of anarchy.
DaveAA, do you have any links to that footage? I havn't seen it yet. If that actualy occured than that officer was in violation of procedure. Beanbag rounds aren't to be used at extremely close ranges. But then again, we don't know what happened just before. Who knows what the long-hair did? But nonetheless, the officer should have known better.
The whole thing is a mess and I think that the protesters won this round, no question. Notice now how similar riots are taking place all over the world, Phillipines, London, etc.
I may be one of the few free-traders who is anti-WTO. The fact is that most protesters actually seem to want a more powerful WTO. In essence the seem to be calling for a WTO that can regulate the environment and labor laws on an international level. Bad news.
The police in the end looked bad because there is tape which makes it look that they are overreacting. I saw a tape showing them shoving around a well-dressed lady on the sidewalk. Perhaps it was a setup, but it still looks bad when you are roughing up people calmly walking down a sidewalk.
This happens a lot in foreign countries. I once saw a protest/disturbance in a South American country where they brought out the water cannon. A businessman tried to cross the street to get away from the protest and into his business. The mobile water cannon turned around and literally blew the man across the street. That's the problem in these cases, especially when martial law is declared.
I may be one of the few free-traders who is anti-WTO. The fact is that most protesters actually seem to want a more powerful WTO. In essence the seem to be calling for a WTO that can regulate the environment and labor laws on an international level. Bad news.
The police in the end looked bad because there is tape which makes it look that they are overreacting. I saw a tape showing them shoving around a well-dressed lady on the sidewalk. Perhaps it was a setup, but it still looks bad when you are roughing up people calmly walking down a sidewalk.
This happens a lot in foreign countries. I once saw a protest/disturbance in a South American country where they brought out the water cannon. A businessman tried to cross the street to get away from the protest and into his business. The mobile water cannon turned around and literally blew the man across the street. That's the problem in these cases, especially when martial law is declared.
Valdez,
You have a good point about the protesters wanting a more powerful WTO. I hadn't thought of it quite that way before. That makes me think that our country might be more willing than I thought to have unelected officials from an amalgamation of nations oversee and override our constitution. The more I see of the WTO and organizations like it, the more nervous I become.
When put together with the fact that NATO, a organization supposedly formed for defensive purposes, used their power for an aggressive action in support of a coalition of nations, I worry also.
Now we are finding that there weren't as many mass executions and way more hyperbole than we first thought. That method of action and government reporting, resonates in my ear like the sound of a cracked bell being rung loudly and for an overlong period of time. It sounds familiar, kinda like the Waco situation, when Reno was talking about fully automatic weapons and child molestation only to find out that there wasn't much of any thing there. So they say, "oh well, what's done is done, and besides, we only did it to save the children."
------------------
jones
You have a good point about the protesters wanting a more powerful WTO. I hadn't thought of it quite that way before. That makes me think that our country might be more willing than I thought to have unelected officials from an amalgamation of nations oversee and override our constitution. The more I see of the WTO and organizations like it, the more nervous I become.
When put together with the fact that NATO, a organization supposedly formed for defensive purposes, used their power for an aggressive action in support of a coalition of nations, I worry also.
Now we are finding that there weren't as many mass executions and way more hyperbole than we first thought. That method of action and government reporting, resonates in my ear like the sound of a cracked bell being rung loudly and for an overlong period of time. It sounds familiar, kinda like the Waco situation, when Reno was talking about fully automatic weapons and child molestation only to find out that there wasn't much of any thing there. So they say, "oh well, what's done is done, and besides, we only did it to save the children."
------------------
jones
Johnny Got His Gun.1
New member
DaveAA
I saw the same footage several times. Indeed, the protestor, despite whatever might have been done earlier by him, was nonthreatening at that moment. Entropy applies here: The lowest amount of energy required for the most stability. That LEO didn't have to (1) nail the protestor in the grion or (2) shoot him with the bean bag (which looked mighty ineffective on the video footage). If it had been someone more self-defense oriented, I'd say the LEO could have had that gun taken from him and wrapped around his head, but I digress.
Did anyone see the footage of a male protestor crossing a crosswalk and holding a posterboard placard? The LEO nearest him took the placard from him. I'm sorry, but I do believe there were at least two Constitutional violations in that incident: peaceable assembly (one guy, for Pete's sake!) and censorship.
I saw the same footage several times. Indeed, the protestor, despite whatever might have been done earlier by him, was nonthreatening at that moment. Entropy applies here: The lowest amount of energy required for the most stability. That LEO didn't have to (1) nail the protestor in the grion or (2) shoot him with the bean bag (which looked mighty ineffective on the video footage). If it had been someone more self-defense oriented, I'd say the LEO could have had that gun taken from him and wrapped around his head, but I digress.
Did anyone see the footage of a male protestor crossing a crosswalk and holding a posterboard placard? The LEO nearest him took the placard from him. I'm sorry, but I do believe there were at least two Constitutional violations in that incident: peaceable assembly (one guy, for Pete's sake!) and censorship.
I started a new thread with something that everyone here should read. It confirms everything I was saying, to a T.
As always, everything should be taken with a grain of salt, but here is the scoop from someone who was there:
http://www.thefiringline.com:8080/forums/showthread.php?threadid=33267
I would have put it here, but it is really long and maybe a slightly different topic than the original intent of this thread.
As always, everything should be taken with a grain of salt, but here is the scoop from someone who was there:
http://www.thefiringline.com:8080/forums/showthread.php?threadid=33267
I would have put it here, but it is really long and maybe a slightly different topic than the original intent of this thread.
Rich Lucibella
Staff
Rabbit-
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Would you let that happen at the white house ?[/quote] Well it would definitely prove the existence of God!
Rich
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Would you let that happen at the white house ?[/quote] Well it would definitely prove the existence of God!
Rich
Ed Brunner
New member
It is the US vs. THEM situation all over again. I am not against LEO's, but I suspect the Seattle PD cars have the words "To Protect snd Serve" on them. If i were a conspiracy theorist I would have to say that a local PD was subverted to NWO and that more will follow.
I am not completely in favor of unlimited peaceful protest, but I expect police not to abuse peaceful citizens and those guilty should be punished.
------------------
Better days to be,
Ed
I am not completely in favor of unlimited peaceful protest, but I expect police not to abuse peaceful citizens and those guilty should be punished.
------------------
Better days to be,
Ed
Maybe we can get a little cross-pollination here. There's a new board (pop. 15) that evidently just started up about Law Enforcement at http://forums.law-enforcement.com/f-bin/Ultimate.cgi?action=intro
Sounds like another place to air the above sentiments and see what some other folks in the trenches have to say.
Sounds like another place to air the above sentiments and see what some other folks in the trenches have to say.
DC , How true! Where are todays real free traders? After WW1 Wilson tried to create the International Trade Tribunal. Free traders shot it down. Truman's International Trade Organization was held at bay by free traders. This new beast is a product of the Clinton administration's 1995 Uruguyan Round of GATT trade talks. Free traders missed this one. Since it is out of the cage it will be much harder kill.
Paul Revere
New member
What exactly is FREE TRADE? It isn't really FREE. Yes, I understand the logic behind providing other Nations the opportunity to "share in the wealth" experienced by larger industrialized nations like the U.S.
But the term "free trade" is just another catch phrase to lure in the nodding and ignorant masses to this Global monopoly scheme being set up by the same folks that have established the UN, NATO, GATT, and a multitude of other global organizations. Free trade opens the door for two things here in America, 1) reduction of domestic jobs, and 2) gradual reduction of wages and standards of living, while nations like Mexico grow in these terms.
You have to admit, that the protests in Seattle made the WTO seem legitimate in its eventual global regulatory role. Why would it be so unheard of that the same folks who organized the trade talks, also organizied the protesters? Protesters were bussed in to the event. And there was no doubt some civil disobedience planned. A major media event.
What should have stood out most significantly, was the protection to the delegation that was provided. Especially on the day Klinton arrived. Very, very suspicious.
Reminds me of the secret meetings of the Bilderbergers.
But the term "free trade" is just another catch phrase to lure in the nodding and ignorant masses to this Global monopoly scheme being set up by the same folks that have established the UN, NATO, GATT, and a multitude of other global organizations. Free trade opens the door for two things here in America, 1) reduction of domestic jobs, and 2) gradual reduction of wages and standards of living, while nations like Mexico grow in these terms.
You have to admit, that the protests in Seattle made the WTO seem legitimate in its eventual global regulatory role. Why would it be so unheard of that the same folks who organized the trade talks, also organizied the protesters? Protesters were bussed in to the event. And there was no doubt some civil disobedience planned. A major media event.
What should have stood out most significantly, was the protection to the delegation that was provided. Especially on the day Klinton arrived. Very, very suspicious.
Reminds me of the secret meetings of the Bilderbergers.
I don't mean to insult anyone, but it appears to me that some of the posters here do not understand macro economics 101.
The benefit of free trade is based on the notion of comparative advantages.
For example, let's look at two countries. In country A, it costs $100 to make a computer and $5 to make a shirt. In country B, it costs $150 to make a computer, while it costs only $1 to make a shirt. Let's say that the consumers both countries have $200 to spend total.
That means under autarky (no free trade), country A can buy 2 computers or 1 computer and 20 shirts or 40 shirts only. Country B can buy 1 computer and 50 shirts or 200 shirts.
Now there is free trade. Now, both countries can buy 2 computers (same as before for A, improvement of 1 for B), 1 computer and 100 shirts (improvement of 80 shirts for A, 50 for B) or 200 shirts (improvement of 160 shirts for A, same as before for B).
So, as can be seen, free trade allows countries with natural advantages to specialize and become more efficient manufacturers. For example, Indonesia can make a shirt for $5 while the same shirt may cost $25 to make in the US. At the same time, US can make a 737 for $15 million while in Indonesia, it would cost $100 million (if it can even make a jet).
So, what's the lesson for American labor? Americans workers are more expensive, because they are fed better, clothed better, have better homes and are purportedly better educated and more technology trained than, say, illiterate Indonesian workers. If that's the case, instead of insisting on competing for $5 shirts, the better educated workers ought to make aircraft or some such thing that takes advantage of their superior education and training.
It would be foolish to insist on making a shirt for $25 that someone else can make $5 and then cry foul when the employer moves to the place where it can be made for $5.
Skorzeny
------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu
[This message has been edited by Skorzeny (edited December 06, 1999).]
The benefit of free trade is based on the notion of comparative advantages.
For example, let's look at two countries. In country A, it costs $100 to make a computer and $5 to make a shirt. In country B, it costs $150 to make a computer, while it costs only $1 to make a shirt. Let's say that the consumers both countries have $200 to spend total.
That means under autarky (no free trade), country A can buy 2 computers or 1 computer and 20 shirts or 40 shirts only. Country B can buy 1 computer and 50 shirts or 200 shirts.
Now there is free trade. Now, both countries can buy 2 computers (same as before for A, improvement of 1 for B), 1 computer and 100 shirts (improvement of 80 shirts for A, 50 for B) or 200 shirts (improvement of 160 shirts for A, same as before for B).
So, as can be seen, free trade allows countries with natural advantages to specialize and become more efficient manufacturers. For example, Indonesia can make a shirt for $5 while the same shirt may cost $25 to make in the US. At the same time, US can make a 737 for $15 million while in Indonesia, it would cost $100 million (if it can even make a jet).
So, what's the lesson for American labor? Americans workers are more expensive, because they are fed better, clothed better, have better homes and are purportedly better educated and more technology trained than, say, illiterate Indonesian workers. If that's the case, instead of insisting on competing for $5 shirts, the better educated workers ought to make aircraft or some such thing that takes advantage of their superior education and training.
It would be foolish to insist on making a shirt for $25 that someone else can make $5 and then cry foul when the employer moves to the place where it can be made for $5.
Skorzeny
------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu
[This message has been edited by Skorzeny (edited December 06, 1999).]