August 20th Intl Solidarity

While his death was certainly the single greatest tragedy that occured in Genoa, accusing the Italian police of his murder is a dangerous oversimplification if you want to win converts to the movement.

The easily-accessible facts are:

1) the protest crowd had already been chasing the police, including that jeep
2) they had already shoved wooden 2x4s into the jeep - definitely a form of attack.
3) the easiest conclusion is that Carlos picked up the fire extinguisher to throw it in/at the jeep to damage it or hurt the occupants
4) Carlos was thus shot while attacking police as part of a riot.
5) the jeep was clearly parked w/ the front grill up against a cement barrier, and thus had to back up to flee the riot. Unfortunately, his body happened to be in the way.

Thus this rallying cry of "They murdered Carlos!" only serves to once again discredit the protest movement in the eyes of the mainstream.

Now, it's possible that he was only holding it up as a shield. But it's also very possible he was about to throw it. Cops didn't shoot anyone else at Genoa - just this one guy.

Truly objective, responsible reporting would call him something like:

killed during a riot against police, being either murdered, or
killed in combat between fleeing police who sought to block
access to public parts of the city where the G8 summit was
held, and rioters seeking to forcibly gain that access.

Objective, responsible reporting that has the ring of fairness to both sides instead of the ring of prejudice, is the only kind of reporting that will help the protest movement. Anything else only feeds our own frenzy while ruining our credibility with the larger audience we wish to sway.

It's time to start talking and reporting more like a rebellion and less like an angry, hysterical mob.

*Sj

p.s. And just to shut you paranoid fuckers up in advance because you always accuse me of the same dumb shit:

1) If the roles were reversed and Carlos had killed a Genoa cop, *personally* I'd have cheered - I hate the bastards in every country.

2) If you'll re-read this carefully, I HAVE NOT DENIED THAT THE PIGS PULLED A TON OF DIRTY SHIT IN GENOA! NOR HAVE I CLAIMED THE ACTIVISTS DESERVED 95% OF WHAT THEY GOT! (And Im tired of having to point this shit out every time.) The *only* concession I'm willing to make the Genoa PD is that it looks like the cops in that jeep and the protesters attacking it, were in a state of mutually accepted combat. War. Which is fine, but it's not murder. Murder is when you can't reasonably expect that you might die. If he were sitting in his own living room, that would be murder. Anyone attacking armed professional soldiers, however justified (and I DO think it was justified!), should know that they may die. That's nothing more or less than war.

But the Diaz school story seems very cut-and-dried, whereas the Carlos story isn't quite as clear and treating it like it is clear only looks foolish. I'd rather see the Diaz story become the #1 rallying point for us, and keep the Carlos story as a close 2nd issue.

Flame away, you always do.

spider, i know you sit there and think that you are just the voice of reason amongst a bunch of others that aren't. it is really time to grow up. to anyone remotely sane, it is clear that NO ONE NEEDED TO BE KILLED. cops can feel under attack. lots of people feel under attack everyday without killing people. THE COP HAD OPTIONS. do you even know what it means to have someone DIE, spider? like DIE. FOREVER. you are normally just insulting, about even the most sensitive issues, just because you think in your own tiny head that you are right. take into consideration that people's experiences in life determine for them what is happening in the world --- that is the essence of subjectivity. roll with it.

Yeah yeah yeah, rant rant rant.

You have 1, and only 1, good point. The question of whether the cop had the reasonable option to shoot Carlos in a less-lethal target zone (leg, stomach) instead of going for a head shot.

Looking at the photos, I'd say it's reasonable that Carlos actually gave the cop no other good choices but for a head shot, given where Carlos was holding the fire extinguisher (whether as a shield or a weapon is irrelevant).

That's just my opinion. It's still a very good question that should be kept alive as part of the issue of the killing.

Other than that.. try following your own advice. Have YOU ever been in such a situation as that cop, under attack by an angry mob of superior numbers at close range and faced with the problem of defending yourself with a deadly weapon without causing unnecessary harm? Alright then, shut up. I'm not the one jumping to conclusions here. In fact, I'm the one coming out against it.

I won't dignify the rest of your crap with a response.

We know the cops should not have been blocking access to the public areas of the city surrounding the summit.

We know that combat ensued between the public and the cops, over this and doubtless other past wrongs committed by the Italian PD.

We know Carlos was killed in this combat. Not "assassinated" by a sniper while walking down to 7-11. Not "murdered" while sitting in his living room. Killed in action, fighting against a police state. Nothing less, nothing more.

The rest, though stated as fact, is only speculation, falsehood, and left-wing propaganda trying to add bad fuel to an otherwise good fire.

*Sj

spider, "good fire"??? is that to imply that your control-freak mentality is geared at making this young man's death the most productive towards your own personal goals?? really, this *is* a good point: consider that your view of what is rational, objective, etc is not shared by everyone else.

Jeezus fucking christ, is there NOT ONE of you capable of arguing against a dissenting opinion without the infantile personal attacks? No wonder the mainstream doesnt listen to you.

Anyway, to directly address your smear tac.. oh, Im sorry, your question.. by "good fire" I do mean precisely that, yes! Because my PERSONAL goal, like most people's here, is to USE his death as an example to the world of what's happening - that some activists are actually willing to stand up and take their protests to the next level, fighting and even dying against the mercenaries of ruling power. I want people to stop seeing such conflict as "terrorism" or "rioting", both of which are loaded terms that imply guilt on the part of the little guy. I want to see that Carlos did not die in vain, by getting the most we can out of his being killed in action against a legitimate enemy.

This goal is hampered by extremist reactionaries who exagerate and misrepresent the true circumstances, making these even more sensational in their short-sighted attempt to whip up a frenzy amongst their fellows. This is not the road to credibility, and the lack of credibility is our single greatest weakness.

Got a problem with that?

As to your "good point", grow up and quit stating irrelevant truths as if they somehow bolster your position. It's a sophmoric tactic at best.

*Sj