Upon the Gears of the War Machine

I am the chokee. This man walked up to me directly and tried to push through the blockade. I said "Sorry sir, the federal building is closed today." He than choked me with one hand and bent my wrist backwards. The cop with the gogles knocked me down from behind, hit me with his billy club, and held my head to the pavement with a combination of club and foot. The whole time my arms were taped to the people on each side of me.

Sounds about right....

If i had been there..I would have walked right over the prone protesters in my golf shoes...

When you put yourself in harms way...don't complain about the treatment...

You all sound like a bunch of Marys....

Buck up lad....you have it easy...protest at 10...then sit around a Starbucks for the rest of the day swapping war stories.....

P*ssies

Sue the bastards. Those police are the Democratic Party's police of San Francisco. The feds are probably the US marshals. Your lawyer can found out. These pictures are excellent evidence of the illegal actions of the San Francisco police and federal goons. There is no excuse for every choking anybody. There was no reason to attack non-violent, non-moving protesters. There are standard arrest procedures, none of which involve choking or attacking in any way people who are non-violent. And, when you collect the money, keep it; you earned it and as a taxpayer, I prefer you get it because all our money usually goes for is war, prisons and police.

I don't know...i didn't see anything in any of the pics that would prove police brutality...

Looks very tame and controlled to me...The protester that was being arrested actually looked to be smiling...

Now, if he had a few teeth missing...that would be another story.....

But, even non-violent protesters can be forcefully removed under the law...not abused...but they can be physically removed....

The guy that claims to have been choked doesn't seem to have any photographic evidence...why is that ?? he has plenty of pics of the other encounters...

Like i said before...buck up and take it like a man....quit whining...or find another career path...

Yes, Randy the protesters put themselves in harm's way. . . AS IT IS THEIR RIGHT TO ORGANIZE AND DEMONSTRATE PEACEFULLY WITHOUT FEAR OF PHYSICAL RETRIBUTION.

Save your golf shoes for your all white country club.

Yes, Randy the protesters put themselves in harm's way. . . AS IT IS THEIR RIGHT TO ORGANIZE AND DEMONSTRATE PEACEFULLY WITHOUT FEAR OF PHYSICAL RETRIBUTION.

Save your golf shoes for your all white country club.

Do have a right to demonstrate and organize peacefully. But the key word is peacefully. They don’t have a right to obstruct people from going about their business or from entering and leaving a building. The moment the protestor forces their message onto others, i.e. harassment or block people from moving about freely, then they go from non-violent to violent. This is the kind of strong-arm tactic that turns off most people and against your cause.

"The moment the protestor forces their message onto others, i.e. harassment or block people from moving about freely, then they go from non-violent to violent."

no, i believe that's called civil disobedience not violence.

if i'm wrong, then your definition of who is violent would have to include gandhi and martin luther king.

"The moment the protestor forces their message onto others, i.e. harassment or block people from moving about freely, then they go from non-violent to violent."

no, i believe that's called civil disobedience not violence.

if i'm wrong, then you would have to include in your list of violent people gandhi and martin luther king.

i think, though, that laying on the ground, sitting with arms linked, holding signs and refusing to leave are all traditional tactics associated with civil disobedience.

stupid.

;) bye.

What about the people that are forcing war on other people right now? Is that not force. What about my friends in the military right now that now may die because the rPresidents oil connections are leading him towards war? Is that not force?

Resistance becomes nessesary when oppression becomes law...

The “Civil Disobedience” answer has always been used as an excuse for the ill-behaved actions of protestors. What is wrong is wrong, whether it’s the antiwar crowd in front of the federal building or the anti-abortionist in front of Planned Parenthood. It’s the actions, not the message I’m pointing out as wrong. When your intent is to physically stop a person (and in some cases making threats) from going about their business and you succeed in physically stop that person from doing that action (such as linking arms and preventing a person from entering a building) then you have committed a violent act.

Is MLK or Gandhi violent people, no, but some of there actions were. There’s a difference between violent acts and violent people. Take Mohammed Ali, as a boxer he was involved in violent acts, but outside of the ring he lives and promote a peaceful lifestyle.

What about the people that are forcing war on other people right now? Is that not force? In a word – Yes. A different kind of force but a force yes.

What about my friends in the military right now that now may die because the Presidents oil connections are leading him towards war? Is that not force? Yes, but I will also point out that your friends VOLUNTEERED to join the military. By volunteering for military service, they went in knowing that there was the possibility that they will see combat and die. If they didn’t like those options, then they shouldn’t have joined.

I’m sure the name calling will begin, but again I point to the actions not the message as being wrong.

...to think long and hard about this conflict, about the real reasons for it, about who benefits and why. And if they come to the conclusion that this is not a just war and that it only serves the interests of the elite, tell them to resist. Hundreds of soldiers refused to fight in the first Gulf War, and they have my honor and respect.

Jeff Paterson, a Gulf War resister, speaks:

http://jeff.paterson.net/troops_msg.htm

Rogus, if it is the "actions not the message" which you are concerned with, then why are you fixated on a bunch of kids standing around duct taped to each other, i.e. physically incapable of violence, and not on a bunch of people in armour and helmets with big clubs running around looking angry? After all .. it is the action, not the message, right? This is actually simple, the problem is, so are you, apparently.
By the way, what exactly is your definition of violent acts such that Gandhi committed? This is a pretty far stretch. Are you trying to redefine violence as anything which offends public order? Sorry, that's not violence. That's just a disturbance or perhaps a protest or demonstration. Violence is the direct physical application of force to another living being in order to cause harm or injury, and nothing else can be violence. You would prefer that the negative connotations associated with violence are attached to things that you don't like by playing with words in this faulty way, but it is simply not correct. We who speak English have other words for other things. When someone blocks you with their body but does not apply force to you, we do not call this violence. It may be annoying, frustrating, whatever, but this does not make it violence no matter how much it pisses us off. It could be defined any number of ways, but violence is not one of them until we are blocked by the use of force to prevent us by applying direct physical force against us in a non-passive way. Such as what the police are here shown doing.
Why don't you focus on their actions and not their message, as you put it?

You mean like throwing tea in the harbor and driving money changers from the temple with a whip?

it is nice to know that some of the americans are actually doing sth in order to maintain in reason the investement of their tax money from their so called goverment.

After watching the video,.. it gave me a whole new perspective on this protest. Not necessarily for the better... but i do applaud the message and effort by the activists. I got the feeling taht alot of the actions by the protests ended up seeming childish.
A guard gets kicked in the ass during a peaceful protest... by a protester,.. which sparks the guard to get the protester arrested. This seems essentialy where the ruckus beings... thing is, she kicked a guard, he has the right to arrest her. Much as they have the right to protest... she crossed the line. Then there was that woman that kept sayin over and over "He pushed me.. did you see that... he pushed me, did you get that on tape?",.. it gave me imagines of being in kindergarden w/ a classmate whining to the teacher that someone pulled her pigtails. She was knocked into as the guards were trying to arrest that one protest.
It seemed that if a guard sneezed on someone,.. everyone would start screaming "Attica" or "SHAME SHAME SHAME"... dont get me wrong though, violence is never needed, and especially not by a bunch of blue meanies. Its that alot of people tend to be over-sensitive at rallies'... shifting the importance from the message and purpose of the protest to ..."did you see that, the guard told me to "Shut up"...after i stuck my middle finger in his face.... why would he do that?"....

The cops pushed, battoned, choked, stomped the protesters first - as punishment (never attempting to make arrests) - this before the alleged "kick" and before the "He pushed me" comment.

Tell that to the Jews who fought their way out of Treblinka.

Did you not understand the context of the "violence is not needed" comment"? ...