These silly occupy protestors, they almost think they have the right to peacefully protest.

[originalpckelly]

They way they act, it's almost as if they think it's in the US Constitution.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

[gateley]

1. If they'd just get a job and go to school, they'd understand what this means. Nitwits.

[randome]

2. What grievances were they referring to...

...when they tried to take over a vacant building?

I'm all for protesting for economic justice but OWS Oakland has no sense of leadership or organization at all if they thought that was a bright idea.

[originalpckelly]

3. Yeah, because Occupy Denver really took over a building or was violent...

when they were arrested.

[pintobean]

4. Peacefully?

If that were the case, there wouldn't be as many problems.

[originalpckelly]

5. Most of these demonstrators are peaceful...

and have been treated like shit and arrested for no reason whatsoever. That is, other than suppressing freedom of speech.

[Rex]

16. Riiiigggghttt.

nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

17. Riddle me this

how many cops does it take to issue a jay walking ticket? If you are an occupier nine.

Don't tell me that this is because this is a hostile crowd.

Second part of the riddle... how long do you wait to issue such a ticket?

Until most of the press is gone.

And this my dear is normal practice across the United States. Those of us who have been telling you this have witnessed this.

I even posted the photo of those nine cops the other day... I will give it to you again.



Oh and let me add the very dangerous people who required that response

[pintobean]

19. I saw it.

You should have shot video. It looks to me like some idiot jay walked right in front of a bunch of cops. You can spin it however you want, but only one cop is issuing a ticket. Lacking video, I wonder why your pic is so small.

[nadinbrzezinski]

23. You can go to the facebook page

and blow it to it's full size.

And you can believe whatever you want... we were there... it is normal practice. You may want to get off that chair of yours, if you truly are curious, and go find out.

And yes, I am dead serious on that.

The event was over those two gentlemen in wheelchairs, and a few others, who are having their benefits taken away by the state of california. After all they can work construction.

[morningfog]

21. There would still be plenty of problems, though.

The vast majority of Occupy camps that have been on the receiving end of excessive police force were in fact completely peaceful assemblies. It turns out, that, regardless of whether the assemblies are peaceful or not, the cops respond with excessive force and often violence.

[Found in Yonkers]

25. Huh?

That's like saying, "If the government says there are WMD, there must be WMD."

[MineralMan]

6. They're not silly, and they do most certainly have that right.

They can also engage in civil disobedience, which they sometimes do. Civil disobedience is breaking laws, and those engaging in that activity may be arrested. In fact, it's expected, and is part of the process of civil disobedience. If there are no arrests, there is no civil disobedience.

They should never be abused, harmed, or otherwise treated in harmful ways, though, because of their civil disobedience. Only whatever means are necessary to effect an arrest should be used by authorities. If authorities use unnecessary force to arrest those engaged in civil disobedience, they should be prosecuted for the use of excessive force in every instance.

That some police do use excessive force is well known. It has happened during protests for as long as there have been protests. Wrong as it is, it is one of the possible consequences of engaging in civil disobedience, and should always be taken into consideration by protesters. For example, bringing children to such protests where civil disobedience may take place is not a good idea.

Protesting is serious business, and every aspect of participation should be considered by everyone involved. For example, if it is planned to enter and take over a building, as was the case in Oakland, there is a risk of doing that. OWS in Oakland publicized their intent to enter and occupy a vacant building in advance of the event. By doing that, they also informed the authorities that they would be engaging in civil disobedience. Arrests were certain, and excessive force by some of the police at that protest was likely, since Oakland PD has a history of such use of excessive force. And, so, that did occur, predictably.

Those police who engaged in it should be held to account, and may well be. Certainly, there's plenty of evidence of it happening.

[Bluerthanblue]

10. well said-

[doc03]

7. MSNBC reported they burned the flag in Oakland last night

Faux is going to be all over that, true or not.

[think]

8. Oakland has been the site of many violent police acts. Not condoning counter violence

but it's good to keep things in context. Lest we forget:

[Bluerthanblue]

9. we do have that right- but we don't

have the right to break other laws while peaceably assembling.

I can't just pitch a tent anywhere I like and set up living there without expecting to be told to move along or face consequences. I can't start fires, damage property or throw things at others without expecting to be held accountable.

Peaceful protest is an incredibly powerful and important means for change. But it isn't easy.

In his speech "A New sense of Direction" MLKjr says:

It was routine procedure while in Birmingham for us to collect hundreds of knives before the demonstrations began to insure against momentary weaknesses of participants. We know from direct experience that even the intensely violent individual can discipline himself if his aims are served by other means. This experience has been duplicated for us in the North. In Chicago, 1966, when vicious, screaming white hoodlums lined the sidewalks, our guards were, in many instances, young gang leaders and members. These men, who are accustomed to violence and expert in its practice, had they been released from their commitment to peaceful marching were entirely capable of reducing the white bullies to shivering pulp. They were capable of peaceful conduct and iron discipline because they were willing to experiment with us in finding a constructive solution.

http://www.carnegiecouncil.org/resources/articles_papers_reports/4960.html

I do think that the majority of those involved with Occupy ______ understand this. Those who don't are hurting everyone.

[think]

12. What is being expressed by the tents and "occupying" is that the system is broken

and corruption allows banksters and wall streeters to break the law with impunity. These actions lead directly to the foreclosure crisis that has affected millions of Americans due to their malevolence.

The tents are part of civil disobedience to draw attention to crimes against the American people by elite crooks. Yes, arrests will be made as a result of this disobedience. But in the face of the absurdity of the Wall Street corruption or the taking a country to war based on total lies, pitching a tent in a public park is a tame act of civil disobedience in comparison.

As for other acts of violence including vandalism these should strongly be admonished and not condoned. It has nothing to do with OWS and it's message anymore than one policeman's act of brutality represents the actions of all police.

As for flag burning I am very against this. Not because I do not believe protesters shouldn't have the right to do it. They do. But it is so counter productive to any message they want to get across that it is just like looking for a fight without cause.

Occupy needs to be careful or they will lose the battle for public favor and it might be not their own doing. Proactive thinking into what the message is and how to most effectively get the point across will be tantamount as the forces opposing OWS plan their strategy to win the "perception battle".

JMO

[Bluerthanblue]

13. all I can say is

I agree with you.

[think]

15. Occupy would be well served to learn some of the lessons you quote from the Civil Rights movement

It is good to make positive suggestions to encourage OWS be a more self disciplined group to make sure the message is not lost by additional and unwanted controversy.

The civil rights movement had a much clearer message though and this may be the hardest thing for OWS to portray to the general public. The message is unclear to many ordinary Americans who are uninformed and the MSM will be no help.

After all protest is done specifically to change public opinion. OWS would be best served to make sure core issues are vocally and visually easy for the public to grasp without any in depth understanding of the cause.

Again JMO

[think]

18. BTW TY This post made me smile and I don't do that enough now days :)

[loyalsister]

11. The right to peaceably assemble yes

The right to peaceably assemble anywhere you damn well please? Nope.
There are reasonable limits that respect property and the general population.

[Hubert Flottz]

14. They might in Russia or Egypt, but not here in the land of the "Free!"

Maybe in Iraq too, where George W Bush fixed it for them, so they'd have free speech and democracy and stuff. But if you don't like it in the USA you should GET OUT! Or Shut Up and let Newt and Sarah fix it!11!11!!111!

[indepat]

20. These silly, albeit brave, protestors must think they live in the land of the free,

a land having a constitution that guarantees specific rights and personal freedoms. Just how silly is such thinking when your nation is a superpower, a national security state having sufficient military resources to exert global hegemony?

[Yo_Mama]

22. The right to peaceful assembly does not include

occupying property or vandalism.

Also the SC has long held that some limits to peaceful assemblies exist, so that permits can be required in many cases.

What was being done in parts of the demonstration in Oakland was not peaceful assembly, but civil disobedience - and in some cases, it was remarkably uncivil disobedience.

OWS Oakland set out to provoke a confrontation with the police and got one. I'm sure there was excessiveness on the part of some cops, but throwing objects at cops and breaking down fences and going into city hall, trashing it, grabbing flags and burning them on the steps of city hall are crimes that warrant arrest.

I don't think OWS Oakland's acts over the weekend reflect the mainstream of the OWS movement, which has been very nonviolent.

These are all important distinctions.

[T S Justly]

24. Damn silly Occupy has a right to everything it's earned. Including the right to protest. (NT)

[sfpcjock]

26. Thom thinks the busy little DC police will be taking out the camp tonight

[pinboy3niner]

27. It's National Park Service jurisdiction, and they don't seem eager to move in

They didn't react, even when the statue was tented. It's still a wait-and-see situation.