Activism Change

OT – Are they nuts, stupid, or just plain evil? Number 2

Question:

In <news:416bf95d$1_3@newspeer2.tds.net>, KKT said: – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Michael wrote: >>> Read again. There’s no indication that this was politically >>> motivated. To the contrary, there’s plenty of evidence that this was >>> a simple burglary. >> Quite possibly so, but (and it may be a bit of yellow journalism >> to lump them together, I admit) there are the goings-on among >> protestors to consider as well.  :-( > Protests don’t work unless the thing/people being protested know it > … a burglary is counterproductive. > Notice that the real protesters entered the building "to send a > clear message to Bush" that they disagreed with his overtime > policies. That message wouldn’t be made by a burglary [definition: > entry to a building when there's no one's present ... " > http://www.local6.com/politics/3785861/detail.html > Kathie

I wasn't talking about the burglary... I was talking about invading the office and vandalizing it.  (OK, so the vandalism was restricted to tossing the place just a little, and improving the look of a Dubya poster... <G>) That sort of behaviour reflects poorly on legitimate protest, and it's illegal.   If laws have to be violated to make a point, what's wrong with simple civil disobedience? ((U))   M

Response:

- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -Michael wrote: >>>Quite possibly so, but (and it may be a bit of yellow journalism >>>to lump them together, I admit) there are the goings-on among >>>protestors to consider as well.  :-( >>Protests don't work unless the thing/people being protested know it >>... a burglary is counterproductive. >>Notice that the real protesters entered the building "to send a >>clear message to Bush" that they disagreed with his overtime >>policies. That message wouldn't be made by a burglary [definition: >>entry to a building when there's no one's present ... " >>http://www.local6.com/politics/3785861/detail.html > I wasn't talking about the burglary... I was talking about invading the > office and vandalizing it.  (OK, so the vandalism was restricted to tossing > the place just a little, and improving the look of a Dubya poster... <G>)

Sorry. That wasn't in the original message. I didn't see it until I GOOGLED to find out about the protests. > That sort of behaviour reflects poorly on legitimate protest, and > it's illegal.   If laws have to be violated to make a point, what's > wrong with simple civil disobedience?

Given the amount of damage [what's a poster go for these days? $5?], it’s not much more than civil disobedience … but I agree, the protesters could have been more circumspect. KKT

Response:

Michael’s reply, "Sad to say, Tick… it *is* the USA.

Filed under: Civil disobedience

Related Posts

• NEW HARDCORE/PUNK AUCTION
• I'm sick
• Pig-snouted protesters mock Cheney, Halliburton
• Guns on Boats
• #Conservatives Dismiss Stand for Children Rally
• New Range War revisited!!!
• car wash soap safe for drain?
• Aviation in Yosemite...November 8th.......Glacier Point, El Cap, Half Dome, Rostrom?
• Just another coincidence... yeah right.
• alt.self-reliance FAQ