Pages

Jump to bottom

17 comments

1 theheat  Wed, Oct 12, 2011 9:31:33am

You notice how whenever some police action goes down the first thing they demand is all video action cease - often to the point of confiscating footage?

If not for video footage, a lot of police crimes would have been explained away to the benefit of the police. They've shown a fondness for historical revisionism when the cameras aren't rolling.

2 BishopX  Wed, Oct 12, 2011 11:24:22am

Menino (the mayor of Boston), said yesterday that "civil disobedience will not be tolerated." I think it's clear that while the Boston police forces were considerably more professional than the NYPD, Boston's politicians are looking much worse.

3 KingKenrod  Wed, Oct 12, 2011 11:24:28am

There's a much better write-up of the incident in the Boston Globe.

[Link: www.boston.com...]

I don't see anything the police did wrong, except telling the media to leave or not film, if that actually happened.

4 Interesting Times  Wed, Oct 12, 2011 11:27:27am

re: #2 BishopX

Menino (the mayor of Boston), said yesterday that "civil disobedience will not be tolerated."

Boston Police new logo

5 BishopX  Wed, Oct 12, 2011 11:44:54am

re: #3 KingKenrod

There's a much better write-up of the incident in the Boston Globe.

[Link: www.boston.com...]

I don't see anything the police did wrong, except telling the media to leave or not film, if that actually happened.

The police weren't acting in good faith. They didn't want to enforce the law, they wanted to arrest the protesters and crush the protest. For those of you who don't know Boston, public transit shuts down between 12:00 and 1:00 am. No buses, no trains, and there is very little parking near the Rose Kennedy Greenway. The police marched into the encampment at 1:20 am, and gave the protestors two minutes to leave before the arrests started. Do you think it's possible to wake up, strike your tent and get out in two minutes? Somebody wanted arrests.

6 Killgore Trout  Wed, Oct 12, 2011 11:54:27am

re: #3 KingKenrod

There's a much better write-up of the incident in the Boston Globe.

[Link: www.boston.com...]

I don't see anything the police did wrong, except telling the media to leave or not film, if that actually happened.

From your link...

Menino defended the police action, saying protesters crossed a line Monday afternoon when they sought to tie up traffic on the North Washington Street Bridge and then expanded their campground to a newly renovated section of the Greenway that authorities had specifically asked the activists to avoid.

“I understand they have freedom of speech and freedom of expression, but we have a city to manage,’’ he said.

One of the main goals of these protests is to create civil unrest. If they succeed it may spread. It still baffles me why liberals still continue to support a movement that's only going to hurt Obama's chances for reelection. It just seems stupid but they are drawn to this stuff.

7 Daniel Ballard  Wed, Oct 12, 2011 11:58:45am

re: #5 BishopX

The police weren't acting in good faith. They didn't want to enforce the law, they wanted to arrest the protesters and crush the protest. For those of you who don't know Boston, public transit shuts down between 12:00 and 1:00 am. No buses, no trains, and there is very little parking near the Rose Kennedy Greenway. The police marched into the encampment at 1:20 am, and gave the protestors two minutes to leave before the arrests started. Do you think it's possible to wake up, strike your tent and get out in two minutes? Somebody wanted arrests.

How much opportunity was there to leave between the declaration of an unlawful assembly & the raid?

8 BishopX  Wed, Oct 12, 2011 12:08:17pm

re: #7 Rightwingconspirator

I'm not quite sure what your asking. The time between who declaring it unlawful and the raid? The police and the protestors had some sort of communications breakdown Monday afternoon related to a student march.

The Police had apparently given someone a deadline to leave the park by 12:00 am, it's unclear who or when. From the Occupy Boston Website:

While police contend that their actions were, at least in part, due to an anarchist contingent that had taken control of the group, this was not the case. While police stood across the street from Occupy Boston’s General Assembly, the General Assmebly voted almost unanimously (80%) to peacefully protest Occupy Boston’s removal from the area that BPD insisted the protestors vacate by 12:00 am Tuesday.

Occupiers have been in constant contact with the Rose Kennedy Greenway Conservancy, a non-profit that manages the publicly park owned by MassDOT, and, prior to their arrests, they had received verbal consent to stay in the park. Further, Occupy Boston has plans to launch a Kickstarter campaign to raise money for restoring damaged areas of the park. Last week, members also unanimously agreed to return to Dewey Square—and any other areas that they occupy—to repair any damaged grass.

9 Tigger2  Wed, Oct 12, 2011 12:58:45pm

re: #6 Killgore Trout

From your link...


One of the main goals of these protests is to create civil unrest. If they succeed it may spread. It still baffles me why liberals still continue to support a movement that's only going to hurt Obama's chances for reelection. It just seems stupid but they are drawn to this stuff.

Do you actually think the middle class sticking up for themselves against the inequality in this country is stupid, I dont, I guess that's why I'm a Dem and your a Repug.

10 Our Precious Bodily Fluids  Wed, Oct 12, 2011 1:39:38pm

re: #6 Killgore Trout

One of the main goals of these protests is to create civil unrest. If they succeed it may spread.

Puh-leez. I'm pretty sure they're collectively capable of wrecking fire hydrants and setting shit on fire if that's what they were looking to do.

11 Daniel Ballard  Wed, Oct 12, 2011 2:22:15pm

re: #10 negativ

It's fair to draw a distinction between lawful protests like scheduled marches and those other protests that use civil disobedience and civic disruptions like closing boulevards or freeeways or businesses.

12 Daniel Ballard  Wed, Oct 12, 2011 2:24:42pm

re: #8 BishopX

I'm asking if they had a fair chance to leave before the raid. BTW opinions really vary on the arrests, hard to find the reality of it all.
[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

13 Killgore Trout  Wed, Oct 12, 2011 3:26:03pm

re: #9 Tigger2

Do you actually think the middle class sticking up for themselves against the inequality in this country is stupid, I dont, I guess that's why I'm a Dem and your a Repug.

Heh.

14 windsagio  Wed, Oct 12, 2011 4:56:17pm

re: #9 Tigger2

Its not a party thing, its an authoritarian thing. PS's #4 sums up the attitude pretty perfectly.

15 lostlakehiker  Wed, Oct 12, 2011 5:56:04pm

re: #5 BishopX

The police weren't acting in good faith. They didn't want to enforce the law, they wanted to arrest the protesters and crush the protest. For those of you who don't know Boston, public transit shuts down between 12:00 and 1:00 am. No buses, no trains, and there is very little parking near the Rose Kennedy Greenway. The police marched into the encampment at 1:20 am, and gave the protestors two minutes to leave before the arrests started. Do you think it's possible to wake up, strike your tent and get out in two minutes? Somebody wanted arrests.

If you're going to argue in good faith, you have to start by acknowledging that the article said a five minute warning was given.

In five minutes, from a sleeping start, I can "disperse". Abandon tent, abandon all possessions except clothes, carry shoes. Done.

Civil disobedience is widely misunderstood. He who decides on civil disobedience has decided to deliberately court, and bear, punishment. The idea is that the public at large will see the punishment as undeserved, thus undermining the moral authority of those who mete it out.

If the plan is not civil disobedience, but to peaceably assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances, then when the riot act is read, instant and full obedience is required to stay with the script and on message. If this means that sleeping bags and spare clothes etc. must be abandoned, so much the better. That's part of the tactic of deliberately bearing a material loss in the hope that the public will see it as undeserved. It also serves to underscore your determination, while not crossing certain legal lines.

If the plan is to come across as unrealistic and disinclined to think ahead, then getting arrested through dithering and making a show of striking tents etc. is just the ticket. Not much of a plan, though.

Somebody in the ranks of OWS needs to explain carefully to the crowd at large what is likely to happen, what the likely price of obedience, and disobedience, to the law is, and whether the plan is to stand their ground and take their lumps, or to decamp when ordered. Arrangements could be made so that people could prepare to do the one, or the other, at a moment's notice.

It is important to the future of OWS that these things not come to blows, at least, none by the hand of the protesters.

16 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin  Thu, Oct 13, 2011 1:06:53am

re: #6 Killgore Trout

One of the main goals of these protests is to create civil unrest.

According to...?

17 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin  Thu, Oct 13, 2011 1:12:38am

re: #15 lostlakehiker

If you're going to argue in good faith, you have to start by acknowledging that the article said a five minute warning was given.

In five minutes, from a sleeping start, I can "disperse". Abandon tent, abandon all possessions except clothes, carry shoes. Done.

Civil disobedience is widely misunderstood.

Finish the thought process...civil disobedience is widely misunderstood mainly by authoritarians who think everyone in their environment is to do as they say.

No, part of the point of civil disobedience, especially nonviolent protest, is to draw attention to police state/authoritarian tactics enacted against those deemed inherently violent, yet who are nonviolent.

I was just getting used to the idea that the rightwingare the ones who learned the lessons of civil rights protest in the 50s and 60s. But the more I read the authoritarian mentality still prevalent, I realize I was on the wrong track with that.

The rightwing has learned nothing, even from their own history of violent, police state suppression. 50 years later, they are still clueless that that kind of repression is what puts these protests on the map in the first place. Without the macing of the young woman by the cop at OWS, would we even be talking about this issue right now?


This page has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
3 weeks ago
Views: 365 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1