Peace demonstrations aren't a bad thing!!!

The BBQ Pit
21

You do understand what it means. But yet you break it down in a literal sense when it is obviously a metaphor. I think this one makes perfect sense. gobear’s post was right on. If you’re still having difficulty understanding the meaning of this metaphor, read his post again.

How do you know how an incarceration experience will affect someone you don’t know? I think it has effected him as much as he says it does. It only takes a small taste to be able to start to imagine what years and years of the same would do to you.

I think it’s kind of cruel to mock him because he was so affected. The whole “That’s not REAL time” attitude is foolish. It is a miserable experience and power is often abused in these places. It is not to be taken lightly, and people should not be made fun of for feeling passionately after an experience with the ugly process that is U.S. law.

Well I think the implication was more like “One night in jail is a joke compared to real incarceration”. Firstly, it’s not a joke at all, it’s just not as drastic. Secondly, I think that sentiment is beside the point. The point is these cops are behaving like political-police. That is not their job. The point is they behave thoughtlessly while people are locked up. They deliberately drew out the process to “teach them peaceniks a lesson about what we gotta do”. They take it as far as to preach to them political ideas while they sit in filthy cages for complaining about those very ideas.

Well this is a lovely statement. I hope you’re joking, cause if not, you’re a dick. What’s wrong with wearing Gas Masks to a protest about a global situation in which the threat of chemical weapons attack looms above us all? As far as I know it’s not illegal to wear a mask. What if it was a Nixon mask? Or a tribal mask? It is our right to make statements with the clothes we wear. Nobody should be arrested for this. They certainly shouldn’t be beaten or physically harmed in any way. The fact that people may really feel they should be hurt is truly disgusting to me. I can’t believe statements like this from a cop reported in the above link to the Denver Post:

Emphasis mine. Since when is it a law that you have to show your face when in public? Not being able to see my face entitles a cop to stop me and search me? That don’t sound right. Is wearing a gasmask illegal? And since when does acting in a manner contrary to what everybody else is doing grounds for reasonable suspicion? Simply being dressed different and walking different is not proper grounds to get stopped and searched in my opinion.

Weapons are illegal and so is violence, fine. They should not have brought a slingshot. But these cops didn’t find any weapons until they grabbed these guys. The protesters did not do anything violent. They arrested them based on what they looked like and their political ideas. You may take it lightly, but I consider these to be grave offenses of civil liberties. Especially when in the context of the epidemic of police abuse we’ve seen in the last 10 years in this country.

Sure. That’s an easy one. The idea of a world where resources are shared among the entire global population and people work, live, and play without the fear of violence or abuse is beautiful. Unattainable, maybe. But I can’t blame ‘em for tryin’. I find it alot more attractive than people lobbing bombs and airplanes at each other while civillians run.

The point is this is not a clear cut issue. The point is it IS confusing. The point is we have the potential to make a big mistake here. The point is that to try to pick a side, when you’re really not sure, is not needed. You can see both sides and decide, fuck, there is no easy answer. Just picking a side and rooting for it doesn’t help the problem at all. You have to be able to see what’s wrong not just in the way other countrys behave, but also the way this country and it’s inhabitants behave. And when you do that, there is no easy answer. I want peace and want to root for that, but I see that the way to peace must be paved with blood (how’s that for irony?) and so I want to root for action for peace. So I am on the fence. I am neutral. And it’s my right. It doesn’t make me stupid or a whiner. The world is crazy right now. I don’t claim to have it figured out because I don’t. This problem is huge, and I think both sides have some very good points.

Glad I’m not the President.

Dalovin’ Dj

22

Yes, but the Tao De Ching is written as poetry conveying philosophy. It’s meant to be understood through its deeper meaning, not in a shallow literal sense.

Many of the statements you and Poly believe sound silly if you only take them literally. Just because people believe Jesus is the Lamb of God, they do not correspondingly believe that He ate grass and said “Baa” a lot.(not to mention that communion wafers aren’t served with mint jelly)

23

Making it singularly bad for being reduced to bon mots.

GOBEAR, surely you can see the difference between a statement that can be intepreted as a metaphor or simile, and therefore still make sense on its face, an a statment that cannot, and therefore does not. Jesus is like a lamb. The absense of knowledge is not like true knowledge.

I fail to see what the argument here is. The statement “the lack of knowledge is true knowledge” makes no sense. It cannot be made to make any sense unless you interpret it to mean something it clearly does not say. Metaphor gets you nowhere. Neither does simile.

I do not attack the underlying philosophy, but this statement, taken out of context – which is how it was posted in the first place – is literally non-sense. Not-truthfulness is true truthfulness. Not-love is true love. Not-hunger is true hunger. These statements are all meaningless, and, to me, obviously so.

24

Actually, wearing a mask above a certain age IS illegal in many jurisdictions, but I have no idea if this is so in Denver. My beef with the masks is two-fold: 1) the protesters qwearing masks are the one who start the violent shit; 2) if you wish to protest, show your face. Hiding your identity makes me think you’re scared or ashamed to reveal your support for this cause publicly.

MLK never wore a mask.
Malcolm X never wore a mask.
Gandhi never wore a mask.
Thoreau never wore a mask.

If you wish to protest nonviolently and obey the law, the cops shouldn’t touch you.

If you wish to protest in non-violent civil disobedience (like chaining yourself to the White House fence), you should accept arrest non-violently, too. Gandhi and MLK never used that “unarrest” crap.

If you wish to protest violently, expect the consequences.

25

Of course, I see the difference, and I note your objection to a statement, “Not-A = A.” If you view it only literally, yes, it’s nonsense. But it was never meant to be read literally. It’s a nonsensical statement that is meant to convey a deeper truth.
Here’s a corresponding statement, “If you want to live, you only have to die.” On the face of it, it’s contradictory–how can you live if you die? But it reflects the belief that to live eternally in Heaven as a child of God, you have to die physically, but you also must die to the world first. You have to renounce your old ways and repent. The fallen soul must die to self in order to be reborn and regenerated by the redemptive power of Jesus.

I shoulda been a preacher.

26

Yes, GOBEAR, and if someone posted “here’s quote I think is great for the SDMB: ‘If you want to live, you have to die,’” with that amount of clarification (none) and that amount of connection to the OP (none), then someone else would be equally as justified in saying “That doesn’t make any sense.” To which you may reply: in other contexts, in other situations, it makes tons of sense. Which in turn is true, but of course will not change the fact that here and now, as used, it makes none.

27

With that caveat, counselor, I will agree with you that, as used in DalovinDj’s post, it makes no sense. I will change my plea to “nolo contendere,” and accept the sentence of the Court.

Hug?

28

The story does a pretty good job of invalidating peace protests…

Not once did the protestors (in the story at least) do anything violent…The simply tried to excerise their rights, but because of the way they dressed, they were persecuted…Even then, they responded non-violently, yet not inactively…They moved to the other side of the street and put the crowd between themselves and the police…Yet, the police kept coming, and kept arresting them…Finally, Our Hero performs a non-violent action to prevent the arrest of a protestor, and not only fails that, but is arrested himself…

End result, the foot of tyranny prevailed, crushing the protestors under it…

29

Do you really not understand how the following applies to the SDMB?

This is a good description of what that quote is understood to mean. I can explain further if you’re still having trouble understanding how such a sentiment can be applied to the straightdope, but I think it’s pretty obvious.

DaLovin’ Dj

30

First- In Philadelphia it is legal to wear a mask in public. It is legal to assemble for a protest. It is not legal to protest while wearing a mask. It’s not a law I like, but it is the law. I understand and accept that if I protest while wearing a mask I will be arrested.

Second-In 6th grade I had to spend a month in the locked psychiatric ward of the Washington children’s hospital. A few years after that, I was at a residential facility for 9 months. Juvenile offenders with psychological problems were sent to the same facility quite often. There was a nintendo in the dorm. There were no bars on the windows or locks on the doors(so we couldn’t lock the door and kill ourselves). But, it was a (minimum security) prison. If you managed to leave the grounds, the police brought you back. If you did not follow regulations, you were punished. These punishments ranged from being locked in the “quiet room”, a padded cell monitored by camera, to loss of privileges, to being moved to the facilities locked ward. MY POINT-14 hours in a holding cell is nothing. He attempted to prevent the arrest of another protestor. This constitutes several crimes. He spent the night in a holding cell. Actions have consequences.

Third- The decision to be neutral affects the outcome. The US aided Afghanistan in fighting the USSR. This was an action and had consequences. The US chose to do nothing when the Taliban took control of Afghanistan. This was an action and had consequences. Switzerland’s neutrality in WW2 had enormous consequences. Neutrality is not the absence of a position, or the choice not to take a position. Neutrality is a position. Inaction is sometimes action. If the protestor had seen the police arresting another protestor and chosen not to act, he would not have been arrested.
Fourth- As of yet, I have heard no viable solution from any peace advocate. Options I have heard them give are

1 Do nothing.
    This results in terrorists being able to attack us all the time, knowing that we won't retaliate against the organizations that fund and train them

2 Pull out of Israel
This is essentially giving to Bin Laden’s demands. If he wants something else, He’ll know he can get it by staging another attack.

3 Give humanitarian aid to Afghanistan.
    We have been doing so for some time. In fact, they recieve more aid from us than they are given by any other country.

4 Bring Bin Laden to trial.
    The Taliban does not recognise the authority of the UN, NATO, or anyone else. Any demand that they surrender Bin Laden for trial would be pointless.
31

It is the will of the people of Virginia that wearing masks in public, in general, is not to be tolerated. The Code of Virginia, § 18.2-422, provides as follows:

dalovindj said:

Now you know better, at least as far as Virginia is concerned.

  • Rick
32

Funny you should ask, since you live in New York City, where it is against the law.

33

Jodi, that qoute was provided with a context. It was the tag to a two page essay promoting neutrality in the current conflict. In that context, it made plenty of sense.

Secondly, the qoute isn’t just “Not knowing is true knowledge.” There are three more lines there elaborating on the initial sentiment, which make the meaning (or at least, a meaning) pretty clear.

Finaly, although the appropriateness of the qoute to this discussion may be debatable, you haven’t really done that. You’ve just said it was “self-evident bullshit,” “stupid,” and “nonsense.” Which is a lovely way to treat the beliefs of others.

34

From the police spokesman:

Uh, last I heard there was no law requiring anyone to identify themselves to a police officer. “Acting in a manner contrary to the way the rest of the crowd is acting”? So if the crowd is silent and one person is singing, the cops have the right and the responsibility to stop the singer? What a fucking idiot.

Lemur

You should apply for Tony Lombard’s job. You’re even stupider than he is. As I’ve explained before, the reason some demonstrators go masked is because prosecutors have developed a nasty habit of filing RICO charges when they can’t find a legitimate charge that will stick. The masks are also used to thwart the face-identifying software that a number of police forces have started using. Hard as it may be for you to understand, where wearing a mask is legal, wearing a mask is not in any way equivalent to having any intent to do anything other than…wear a mask. So far, the only one advocating violence here is you.

gobear

It isn’t, as one of the links notes. In a number of jurisdictions, what is illegal is concealing one’s identity in the course of committing a crime (e.g. Wis Stat s. 939.641) and such laws often apply to any alteration or concealment (including things like dying hair, growing or shaving facial hair, etc.). A number of jurisdictions have struck down laws which bar the wearing of masks absent any other criminal act as a violation of the First Amendment.

Faulty logic. That one or more protestors may have started violence while masked does not mean that all masked protestors are or will be violent.

I’ve explained several times why some demonstrators conceal their faces. You are certainly free to believe what you wish. No matter how wrong it may be.

And wouldn’t it be nice if that were always the case. You might want to talk to some of the survivors of Bull Connor’s hoses and dogs.

Bricker

Has this been tested in court?

35

Otto
A number of jurisdictions have struck down laws which bar the wearing of masks absent any other criminal act as a violation of the First Amendment.

[/quote]

As PLD noted, it is certainly illegal where **Dalovindj ** lives, but your addenedum is noted.

As pure logic goes, you’re right, but I watched the footage from Seattle, Genoa, and I was here in DC, and I saw that the masked protestors were the ones starting trouble. You might as well say that not all masked people in a bank are necessarily robbers.

Do you have a cite for RICO prosecutions of protesters?

And you’re aware that we are not talking about 1965 Selma? The police are not the bad guys, Otto, the people throwing rocks and Molotov cocktails are.

I am all for peaceful peace demonstrations, even if I think the marchers are misguided. Violent peace marchers only hurt their own cause.

36

Yes, and upheld many times - but in each of the cases I’ve found in which the Court of Appeals has upheld convictions under § 18.2-422, (a) the accused did not raise a First Amendment defense, and (b) they were also being tried on robbery charges. (See, e.g., McGill v. Commonwealth, 349 Va. App. 216, 218, (1996)* - decided on sufficient evidence grounds). I cannot find any case in which a First Amendment defense is raised.

I suspect the lack of cases involving only mask-wearing is due to an exercise of prosecutorial discretion.

However, the law is presumed constitutional until shown otherwise. Do you have a case showing the reasoning involved in overturning a mask law on federal First Amendment grounds?

  • Rick
37

MILLER –

I very clearly said “I have not attacked any underlying belief . . . Do not mistake a criticism of the statement itself with criticism of the belief underlying the statement.”

I therefore must assume you cannot read.

GOBEAR, Pax of course. :slight_smile:

OTTO –

This interests me. Why would a racketeering charge stick when an underlying charge wouldn’t? What connects protesting to organized crime? What’s the tie-in between attending a protest and RICO? In other words – Do you have a cite for this?

38

Otto please. You know, and I know, and the American people know that the reason the “anarchists” wear masks is so they can smash shit up and get away with it. This is simply an obvious truth, and I suggest that you get over it.

If you want to argue that people should have the right to smash shit up and get away with it, then argue that. But don’t give me that crap about how wearing a mask is simply peaceful self expression. People wear masks in this circumstance for EXACTLY the same reason the Klan wears masks. Get it?

If the rest of the protesters won’t stop people from wearing masks then they are endorsing violence, just like those old time sheriffs winked at the Klan. And if violence is a justifiable tactic for protestors, then why isn’t it a justifiable tactic for the rest of us to use against the protestors?

First decide if you are in favor of violence or not. If you are not, the masks have to go. The masks are a tool for violence. Stop pretending otherwise because you aren’t fooling anyone.

39

Well, that’s what you said. That’s not quite what you did. I’m not seeing the difference between “belief underlying the statement” with “belief based on the statement,” and I don’t see how you can insult one and not the other.

“I think the New Testament is a steaming pile of dogshit. Not that I have anything against Christians.” Just doesn’t wash, I’m afraid.

You are correct, however, in your assumption. All my posts are generated by randomly pounding on the keyboard. And yet, I’m still one of the better typists on the board. Go figure.

40

At a good distance (I no longer remember how far it was 20 some years ago…maaaaaaybe 25 feet? 40 feet? 100?) it hurts like seventy-eleven kinds of fuck.

And that’s a lot of hurt.

It also leaves a hell of a bruise.

Trust me.

At close range I wouldn’t be surprised if it could break bones.

Fenris