NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=9BF5C7E1-D3B7-47C3-89BC7FCBA07E16F3&title=New%20York%20Police%20Arrest%20264%20Cyclists%20Amid%20Tight%20Security%20Ahead%20of%20Republi can%20Convention&catOID=45C9C78F-88AD-11D4-A57200A0CC5EE46C&categoryname=USA
Already, the NYPD is making arrests of protestors, for one reason or another. The worst part, however, is that these protestors are not the worst by far. Wait until the anarchists come. They'll recreate 9/11, only except they'll move it to Midtown and Uptown.

bump

bump for one last time

Yes, since we are talking about it, I might as well bump this baby. I really do believe that this is gonna be like a beacon to some really bad people. It'll be like a warzone with a lot of teargas used, and I wouldn't be surprised if a small riot breaks out over this.

Awesome. The more Americans see those nutcases riot in the streets the more they'll lean toward Bush.

Awesome. The more Americans see those nutcases riot in the streets the more they'll lean toward Bush.
Yeah, but not before they destroy half of Midtown.

Yeah, but not before they destroy half of Midtown.

Not if the NYPD has their way. So much for peaceful protests.

Awesome. The more Americans see those nutcases riot in the streets the more they'll lean toward Bush.
Exactly. The Dems have done it before, just look at Chicago in 68. They would've destroyed the whole city if Daley (a Democrat) didn't have the CPD beat the shit out of the wackos.

Not if the NYPD has their way. So much for peaceful protests.
It'll probably be that most of the protests are peaceful, but they'll be overshadowed by the nutjobs. Besides, they'll probably pop up everywhere, faster than the NYPD can arrest them.

Exactly. The Dems have done it before, just look at Chicago in 68. They would've destroyed the whole city if Daley (a Democrat) didn't have the CPD beat the shit out of the wackos.

your version of the events of 68 seem to conflict with the generally accepted version. in the more generally accepted version the phrase 'cop riot' plays a rather sizeable role.

Yeah, but not before they destroy half of Midtown.

any evidence that anyone is planning anything of the sort?

No, but I have been toying around with some ideas involving elephant dung...

any evidence that anyone is planning anything of the sort?
What's your problem with figurative speach? No one will destroy half of midtown. At the most, any protestors will break a few windows, perhaps try to loot a few stores. These type of protestors show up at every major trade event, and since most of their ire tends to be geared towards America and whoever the sitting president is, I bet they'll show up here. They're disruptive, annoying, but they don't bring RPGs with them.

See, in my ficitional nation, once protestors start destroying public/private property, the military comes in. Every time they crush a protest, it's like Tiananmen Square in 1989.

See, in my ficitional nation, once protestors start destroying public/private property, the military comes in. Every time they crush a protest, it's like Tiananmen Square in 1989.
I don't want that type of riot control, but it wouldn't be a bad idea to have a battalion of the National Guard nearby, just in case things get real ugly.

Exactly. The Dems have done it before, just look at Chicago in 68. They would've destroyed the whole city if Daley (a Democrat) didn't have the CPD beat the shit out of the wackos.
I don't think they were all Dems, though. But hey, for the past thirty years, they have been the party of protestors. The Republicans prefer to write letters, or bitch on talk shows, or something like that.

What's your problem with figurative speach?

no problem with figurative speech. however, the cops and the media have been flat out saying that we are terrorists, so i'm a bit touchy about it.

no problem with figurative speech. however, the cops and the media have been flat out saying that we are terrorists, so i'm a bit touchy about it.
Oh, that's right. You're an anarchist. But even most of the anarchists I've ever met are nothing like their violent counterparts.

I don't think they were all Dems, though. But hey, for the past thirty years, they have been the party of protestors. The Republicans prefer to write letters, or bitch on talk shows, or something like that.

All the Protesters in Grant Park were Dems. They represented the militant left side that wanted Pinko COmmie McCarthy to be nominated, not moderate Hubert Humphrey.

There were no Conservative protesters there.

All the Protesters in Grant Park were Dems. They represented the militant left side that wanted Pinko COmmie McCarthy to be nominated, not moderate Hubert Humphrey.

There were no Conservative protesters there.
Of course not. The Dems had no conservatives in the party back in the sixties. Not even the Republicans had conservatives.
But I bet that those in Grant Park were not just Democrats, but the Democrats' most fanatical supporters of the time: college students.

Of course not. The Dems had no conservatives in the party back in the sixties. Not even the Republicans had conservatives.
But I bet that those in Grant Park were not just Democrats, but the Democrats' most fanatical supporters of the time: college students.
Yes. College students were the supporters of McCarthey and the ones opposed to Humphrey. And it will be radical college students who do the rioting in New York.

Yes. College students were the supporters of McCarthey and the ones opposed to Humphrey. And it will be radical college students who do the rioting in New York.
Not necessarily. Those college students have grown up. I have read an article in Time Magazine that says that, while liberal college students are still around, conservative and liberatarian ones are overwhelming them. They aren't generally fond of Bush either, but they aren't violent. If anything, the college students of today will do some weird protesting, but nothing violent.
Besides, most of today's anarchists that have attended past events are white males, mostly European, and do this type of stuff as a hobby. They basically do this as a roadshow, and they have just launched an international tour.

All the Protesters in Grant Park were Dems.

haha, now that's just silly. who were the yippies voting for again?

I'm seriously looking forward to this RNC. I cant wait to see the Fox News spin.

haha, now that's just silly. who were the yippies voting for again?

The Yippies were ultra-left Dems who protested when they didn't nominate Eugene McCarthey. They were all liberal Democrats. 1968 is when the pary went from JFK Conservative Democrat control to the ultra-left/

The Yippies were ultra-left Dems who protested when they didn't nominate Eugene McCarthey. They were all liberal Democrats. 1968 is when the pary went from JFK Conservative Democrat control to the ultra-left/
Funny, because I thought the Dems were ultraleft under JFK. He gave a few speaches that sounded vaguely leftist, and blantantly populists, but did little in his tragically short term. LBJ, on the other hand, was probably the most socialist president we ever had.

Sounds like fun.

Funny, because I thought the Dems were ultraleft under JFK. He gave a few speaches that sounded vaguely leftist, and blantantly populists, but did little in his tragically short term. LBJ, on the other hand, was probably the most socialist president we ever had.

JFK was very conservative. He held the conservative values of a Catholic and didn't abandon them like John F'in Kerry. He cut the top marginal tax rates from 90% down to less than 50%. (similar to Bush's tax cut, but even smaller.) He built up defence like Reagan. JFK is what I call a conservative. I know LBJ was a Socialist. He wasn't even liked by JFK and was picked because his value in getting legislation passed.

JFK was very conservative. He held the conservative values of a Catholic and didn't abandon them like John F'in Kerry. He cut the top marginal tax rates from 90% down to less than 50%. (similar to Bush's tax cut, but even smaller.) He built up defence like Reagan. JFK is what I call a conservative. I know LBJ was a Socialist. He wasn't even liked by JFK and was picked because his value in getting legislation passed.
Because of his tragically short term, I cannot say what he did (although I'm forever greatful that he helped avert nuclear war). However, judging by his speeches, he seemed stupid. He told student protestors in Brazil that, no matter what form of government they chose, it was legitamit, because it was backed by the will of the people. A month after that speach, Algeria got its independence from France. The new government was more of mob rule than anything, and it lead to loads of problems. Besides, JFK gains my suspicion because of his foreign aid in Latin America. It had noble intentions, but quite a bit ended up in the hands of left-wing militias, which does make me wonder.
Nevertheless, I wish he served out his term. He'd probably be re-elected, and would keep the growing conflict in Vietnam simply a minor one. He was also a soothing voice, and that was what America needed in that very turbulent decade.

Exactly. The Dems have done it before, just look at Chicago in 68. They would've destroyed the whole city if Daley (a Democrat) didn't have the CPD beat the shit out of the wackos.
Actually it was the police who rioted. Many journalists and peaceful demonstrators were beaten by the CPD. Let's not revise history.

See, in my ficitional nation, once protestors start destroying public/private property, the military comes in. Every time they crush a protest, it's like Tiananmen Square in 1989.
Tiananmen Square was a peaceful demonstration. That is why it had the stature to be respected. Hooilganism is counterproductive in that it is generally viewed as criminal and bolsters an emotional response in support of the opposition.

Off to bed.

If you are coming in tomorrow be safe and watch that fine line between peaceful protest and helping Bush get elected by acting the knucklehead.

Be safe out there!
Ciao!

Am I the only one who finds the comparison in the title--the peaceful demonstrations in NYC to the pitched battles between a militia and an occupying force in Najaf--a bit disgusting? Hyperbole is one thing, but that comparison is ridiculous.

I saw them hoisting big nets of balloons up into the hall roof in advance of the chest-pounding, hooting and screaming we'll see over the next few days, and I found myself hoping that someone, somewhere had the foresight to fill them with water. Or liquid shit.

Personally, I hope the Republican convention goes off without a hitch, and that the protests are as disciplined and orderly as the UPJ march was yesterday. They've already said they'll try to paint any disturbances as the work of the mainstream Democratic party, and I want to give them the proverbial finger without giving them any ammunition.

Am I the only one who finds the comparison in the title--the peaceful demonstrations in NYC to the pitched battles between a militia and an occupying force in Najaf--a bit disgusting? Hyperbole is one thing, but that comparison is ridiculous.
There were only a few thousand troops involved in the fighting in Najaf. Out of 200,000 largely peaceful protestors, at least a thousand or so should get out of hand, and a few may even try to incite a riot.

Just make sure you're nowhere near Gramercy Park tomorrow around 3pm ...

*shifty eyes*

There were only a few thousand troops involved in the fighting in Najaf. Out of 200,000 largely peaceful protestors, at least a thousand or so should get out of hand, and a few may even try to incite a riot.
After the largely uneventful protest yesterday, are you ready to back off the prediction? And by the way--you were comparing a largely peaceful protest to a war zone. That was my beef.

After the largely uneventful protest yesterday, are you ready to back off the prediction? And by the way--you were comparing a largely peaceful protest to a war zone. That was my beef.
No, I'm not. They're probably on their way. And if you ask me, I'm very afraid that some Republican protestors may try to combat them. I'm very glad I'm not in New York, but it is a shame that the city is going under such abuses. But they've been abused for years and years. In many ways, they're more of a warzone than Jerusalem, Fallujah, or Kandahar.

Well, it's almost 11:00 p.m. in New York, and thus far no news outlet is reporting any sort of Najaf-like insurrection in the streets, so unless all hell breaks loose in the next hour, I'd say you missed this one.

Well, it's almost 11:00 p.m. in New York, and thus far no news outlet is reporting any sort of Najaf-like insurrection in the streets, so unless all hell breaks loose in the next hour, I'd say you missed this one.
Okay, so Monday isn't the date. It'll happen this week, and rest assured that it won't just be anti-Bush protestors.

See, in my ficitional nation, once protestors start destroying public/private property, the military comes in. Every time they crush a protest, it's like Tiananmen Square in 1989.
Soooo is this the kind of "freedom" and "democracy" that the US wants to export to countries like Iraq?

I saw them hoisting big nets of balloons up into the hall roof in advance of the chest-pounding, hooting and screaming we'll see over the next few days, and I found myself hoping that someone, somewhere had the foresight to fill them with water. Or liquid shit.
Now that would be hysterical. :D