NationStates Jolt Archive

ACTIVISTS ARRESTED PROTESTING ARIEL SHARON'S VISIT TO THE
WHITE HOUSE

Today, as Ariel Sharon and George Bush met in the White
House, the Muslim American Society Freedom Foundation, the
A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition, and other organizations held a
press conference, rally and civil disobedience action
demanding "Free Palestine." The Muslim American Society
Freedom Foundation initiated today's action, at which
Mahdi Bray, the Executive Director of the MAS Freedom
Foundation, and Sarah Friedman, National Outreach
Coordinator for the A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition, were arrested
on the White House sidewalk in an act of protest against
the Sharon/Bush war on the Palestinian people. When the
police blocked the protest from marching forward on the
White House sidewalk, Mahdi Bray refused to leave and
Sarah Friedman stepped forward from the group of assembled
demonstrators and joined him. While they were being
arrested, supporters held signs reading "Ariel Sharon and
George Bush are War Criminals" and chanted "Occupation is
a Crime, from Iraq to Palestine." Photos can be viewed at
http://www.internationalanswer.org/news/update/041404sharon.html

is it possible for someone to stay neutral nowadays?

War is not the answer
But neither is A.N.S.W.E.R.

War is not the answer
But neither is A.N.S.W.E.R.

what, you don't like the old crypto-stalinists?

both sharon and hamas are asses. I support no one

War is not the answer
But neither is A.N.S.W.E.R.

what, you don't like the old crypto-stalinists? I didn't know that they were crypto-stalinists. Did those creepy PLP people get a copyright on the designation 'Stalinist' or something?

I didn't know that they were crypto-stalinists. Did those creepy PLP people get a copyright on the designation 'Stalinist' or something?

well, you might get the wwp to say that they were big fans of stalin, and maybe the iac. but i'm pretty sure answer is still pretending to be whatever it is they claim they are that certainly isn't a front group for those old stalies.

Since your posted link failed to maybe you can enlighten us as to what charges were filed and where they were filed? The only thing that I could see is that the protesters pushed on when told not to by the police. Can you also post the legality of the protest? Were the proper forms filed and if so where and when? There does happen to be legal and illegal forms of protest. When protesters decide they don't want to adhere to the laws people get arrested.

As usual, Red Arrow's posts prompt the only appropriate reply: a big :roll:

Since your posted link failed to maybe you can enlighten us as to what charges were filed and where they were filed? The only thing that I could see is that the protesters pushed on when told not to by the police. Can you also post the legality of the protest? Were the proper forms filed and if so where and when? There does happen to be legal and illegal forms of protest. When protesters decide they don't want to adhere to the laws people get arrested.

i'd assume it would be 'failure to disperse'.

forms. bah. why the fuck should people have to get the government's permission to tell the government to fuck off?

Agroup of people attempting to march on the White House without permission or authorisation and refusing to leave were arrested. I can't believe it! What a travesty!

Since your posted link failed to maybe you can enlighten us as to what charges were filed and where they were filed? The only thing that I could see is that the protesters pushed on when told not to by the police. Can you also post the legality of the protest? Were the proper forms filed and if so where and when? There does happen to be legal and illegal forms of protest. When protesters decide they don't want to adhere to the laws people get arrested.

i'd assume it would be 'failure to disperse'.

forms. bah. why the f--- should people have to get the government's permission to tell the government to f--- off?Maybe because of things like Kent State.

This isn't even a current story. I guess cut&paste takes time.. 5 or 6 days int his case.

forms. bah. why the f--- should people have to get the government's permission to tell the government to f--- off?Maybe because of things like Kent State.

i'd say things like kent state are exactly why the government has no right to demand that we 'go through proper channels' in order to protest. they are part of why the government should fuck off. unless the claim is that you should do so because otherwise the government will shoot you. that's true, but then again they shoot those they term 'good' protestors too. though they stay away from metal bullets mostly these days.

forms. bah. why the f--- should people have to get the government's permission to tell the government to f--- off?Maybe because of things like Kent State.

i'd say things like kent state are exactly why the government has no right to demand that we 'go through proper channels' in order to protest. they are part of why the government should f--- off. unless the claim is that you should do so because otherwise the government will shoot you. that's true, but then again they shoot those they term 'good' protestors too. though they stay away from metal bullets mostly these days.
Requiring state authorization for protests makes perfect sense. Its a matter of public safety. If any asshole has a legal right to block highways and railroads as they please under the guise of "political protest", the society simply cannot function. If protests are done without proper supervision, the police won't be there in time when a legitimate protests will turn into a wild violent riot. And speaking of the A.N.S.W.E.R. and other anti-globalists, their rallies are known to exersise a higher degree of violence than those of the Neo-Nazis :roll:

And speaking of the A.N.S.W.E.R. and other anti-globalists, their rallies are known to exersise a higher degree of violence than those of the Neo-Nazis :roll:

ha!

you've never been subjected to 7 hours of speakers at a 'rally'. answer protests are tame to the point of boredom.

and an objective look at the global justice movement shows a lot of violence coming from the state and some minor property destruction from us. we never kill anyone - something that neo-nazis are particularly known for.

Requiring state authorization for protests makes perfect sense. Its a matter of public safety. If any asshole has a legal right to block highways and railroads as they please under the guise of "political protest", the society simply cannot function.

only if you accept the legitimacy of the state to authorize protests against it in the first place.

and any society with enough discontent in it to have a protest that really stops the society from functioning is due for a revolution, whether the state authorizes it or not. otherwise all you have is a minor inconvenience at worst.

On a related note, it is interesting how the government finds it convinient to label longshoremen's strikes 'terrorist' acts that block off major ports, while turning a blind eye to lockouts that do the same thing.

And speaking of the A.N.S.W.E.R. and other anti-globalists, their rallies are known to exersise a higher degree of violence than those of the Neo-Nazis :roll:

ha!

answer protests are tame to the point of boredom.

and an objective look at the global justice movement shows a lot of violence coming from the state and some minor property destruction from us. we never kill anyone - something that neo-nazis are particularly known for.[/quote]
The riots incited by the A.N.S.W.E.R.'s member organizations during each of the WTO conferences during the last few years were quite scary. I am not talking just about the coalition as a whole, but of the organizations it includes- which can be divided into three clear groups: radical Communists, radical Islamists like Al-Awda and radical environmentalists of the "watermelon" variety (green on the outside, red on the inside).

Much of the violance reported in the media is incited and often wholly perpetrated by the police. Minor poroperty destruction is often used as a diversion tactic to save peaceful protesters from police brutality. Just take a look at Maiami.

The riots incited by the A.N.S.W.E.R.'s member organizations during each of the WTO conferences during the last few years were quite scary. I am not talking just about the coalition as a whole, but of the organizations it includes- which can be divided into three clear groups: radical Communists, radical Islamists like Al-Awda and radical environmentalists of the "watermelon" variety (green on the outside, red on the inside).

answer is a front group that was formed right after 9/11 to oppose whatever war was handy in the hopes of furthering the stalinist cause of the workers world party. they have jack shit to do with any of the anti-neoliberal organizing and protests going on.

On a related note, it is interesting how the government finds it convinient to label longshoremen's strikes 'terrorist' acts that block off major ports, while turning a blind eye to lockouts that do the same thing.

but you see, lockouts are man's god-given right. strikes, on the other hand, are clearly organized by agents of the latest boogey man. duh

Here, we get arrested for marching on the sidewalk in front of the White House when a cop tells us not to, yet drunk punk rockers have been pissing on the lawn at Buckingham Palace for decades.

Just food for thought.