|
Hello,
I'm not sure you understood
either of my points, which were: (1) before making the kind of
condemnatory statements that the other fellow did, you ought to first
investigate and make sure you've got your facts straight and be sure you've got
the whole picture, and (2) you ought to understand what the typical
police response has been to protests, both in Genoa and other places. You
ought to be as critical of statements by the police as of any other side.
In your post, you seemed to be taking the police position as the default,
"respectable" position. It isn't, especially when it comes to
protests. Also you used an analogy of war, which in the context I think is
quite inappropriate: there's a big difference between being in a van armed with
live ammo and being outside it with a fire extinguisher. If you look at
the whole context you'll see the police were beating, gassing, etc. people,
including nonviolent ones, for hours without provocation. I've had
this happen to myself, and it's become SOP for police at large protest
events. Check the sources I mentioned for more info. To sum up, I'll
quote from http://www.commondreams.org/news2001/0722-01.htm:
"The
killing by police on July 20 of Carlo Giuliani was the inevitable result of an
increasing willingness to use excessive force as part of a broad denial of
democratic participation in the global decision making process.
The overwhelming number of demonstrators at these
mass demonstrations are engaged in peaceful, non-violent protest. The
appropriate and legal response to potential and actual violence is to guarantee
an adequate police presence and to arrest any protestors who engage in violent
conduct. (Collins v. Jordan, 9th Cir. 1997). The recent killing of a protestor
is an inevitable consequence of the use of "collective punishment" by police
against large numbers of political demonstrators, rather than enforcement of the
law while protecting the right to speak as the Constitution demands. In the
United States, this collective punishment has thus far taken the form of
chemical weapons and less-lethal rounds fired into crowds; but anything that
causes someone to fear engaging in speech because of possible punishment for
someone else's acts is profoundly dangerous to the proper functioning of any
democracy."...
"The suppression of legitimate First Amendment activities by legions of police and government agents suited in riot gear and engaging in para-military tactics not only has a terrifying effect on demonstrators but also perpetuates an atmosphere of violence. Such tactics are self-defeating in that they not only frighten protestors, but also make young and inexperienced police officers more nervous, the likely result being the loss of human life." - Manu On 24 Jul 2001 15:26:55 -0700 "Robert J. Hansen" <rjhansen@inav.net> writes:
> > This is a rather grotesque and obvious troll, but I feel > > compelled to respond to it (silly me). Before making such > condemnatory > > Well, your own response isn't much better. In the interests of > fairness, I'll make a couple of (small) comments. > > > look at the facts first. If you are at all interested in the > facts, > > check out www.commondreams.org, www.indymedia.org, > www.webactive.com, and > > www.zmag.org, and see the reports on Genoa. You might be > interested to > > The only one I'm familiar with is Indymedia, whom I have little > respect > for after catching some of their news coverage in glaring > contradictions. Not that I'm a big fan of mass media, either--but > every > journalistic outlet is in somebody's pocket. Every last one of > them. > Indymedia and others, no less so than CNN. > > > know that the police van drove over the protester's body twice, > and that > > the officer who killed the protester is now charged with murder. > Also > > The fact that the protester was run over twice is, (a), > disputed--the > reports I've seen say it was once, and (b), possibly irrelevant. > When > the operation takes a sharp detour into Seriously Fuckedville, very > weird things happen. The protester being run over is one of--a > morbid > reminder of the chaos and confusion of what's euphemistically > called > "low intensity conflict", the action of a carabineri who, fearing > for > his life, used every weapon at his disposal to ensure his survival, > up > to and including grinding the offender underneath the wheels, or > the > vengeful and bloodthirsty act of an out-of-control cop. > > Before you go about saying the protester was dead before he hit > ground, > please give consideration to whether or not the carabineri knew it. > The > fog of war that associates trips to Seriously Fuckedville can keep > you > from seeing your hand in front of your face. > > The carabineri in question has been detained and an investigation is > underway to ascertain whether or not his use of force was correct. > The > fact that this investigation is underway in no way suggests the > carabineri's action was wrong. It's standard procedure for police > forces in a democracy--the people demand thorough investigations > into > police uses of force. > > His arrest is almost certainly a token gesture meant to try and > appease > some of the protesters: given how recently this happened, I'd be > surprised if the Genoan prosecutor even had forensic reports on the > bullet back yet. > > ===== > > Now that I've done my best to inject some reason into the discourse, > I'm > going to step very far out of this discussion. It's not germane to > the > Millennium's End list, near as I can tell, and I really don't want > to > see another firestorm envelop the list. > > > > -- > Millennium's End list: mail millenniums-end-l-request@firedrake.org > with > subject "unsubscribe" to leave > > "The killing by police on July 20 of Carlo Giuliani
was the inevitable result of an increasing willingness to use excessive force as
part of a broad denial of democratic participation in the global decision making
process.
The overwhelming number of demonstrators at these
mass demonstrations are engaged in peaceful, non-violent protest. The
appropriate and legal response to potential and actual violence is to guarantee
an adequate police presence and to arrest any protestors who engage in violent
conduct. (Collins v. Jordan, 9th Cir. 1997). The recent killing of a protestor
is an inevitable consequence of the use of "collective punishment" by police
against large numbers of political demonstrators, rather than enforcement of the
law while protecting the right to speak as the Constitution demands. In the
United States, this collective punishment has thus far taken the form of
chemical weapons and less-lethal rounds fired into crowds; but anything that
causes someone to fear engaging in speech because of possible punishment for
someone else's acts is profoundly dangerous to the proper functioning of any
democracy. The suppression of legitimate First Amendment activities by legions of police and government agents suited in riot gear and engaging in para-military tactics not only has a terrifying effect on demonstrators but also perpetuates an atmosphere of violence. Such tactics are self-defeating in that they not only frighten protestors, but also make young and inexperienced police officers more nervous, the likely result being the loss of human life. http://www.commondreams.org/news2001/0722-01.htm |