flynn23 wrote:
]
] You're kidding right?
]
] You're more concerned about your daily commute versus this
] woman's right to protest? Why did the 'authorities' refuse her
] request for a permit? Why are 'protesters' being wrangled up
] in a barbed-wire fenced off area, jokingly referred to as the
] 'free-speech zone'? Why does the RNC require 3x the amount of
] security detail than the DNC does? Not to say that the DNC
] somehow earned a repreive from this kinda stuff, but you've
] got to expect a bit more vitrial against the RNC considering
] that millions of people rioted and protested worldwide when
] our current administration decided to invade a non-threatening
] country.

*** Non-threatening country? Iraq invaded Kuwait. Iraq slaughtered tens of thousands of innocent people, using chemical weapons that they developed. Iraq made certain agreements in order to end the first Gulf War. Iraq consistently and intentionally violated those agreements, including one major clause of allowing inspectors to monitor their weapons activities. Iraq refused to cooperate on terms that Iraq itself agreed to. In the past, they had tons of chemical and biological weapons, and had also researched and actively pursued nuclear weapons. Their is possible evidence these weapons have now been moved to other surrounding nations. Bottom line -- hardly the actions of a non-threatening country.
]
] I find it atrocious that people will use inclement weather as
] an excuse to telecommute in a second, but when we've actually
] got something *important* going on, like exercising our
] democratic right to voice our opinions, then it somehow
] becomes an inconvenience.
]
*** I do believe in the right to protest, but it does have to be done in a way that doesn't endanger other citizens of our country. Protestors saying they are going to 'wreak havoc' isn't the best way to get a permit. Either get a permit by displaying peaceful ways to protest, or get arrested protesting other ways. Read below for more on havoc.

] And no, it doesn't matter whether most of these people are
] there just to wreak havoc. If we only allowed 'legal' protest
] and 'non-disturbing' signs of discord, then we would've never
] had the civil rights movement or women's suffridge. Especially
] considering that this administration has found it absolutely
] necessary to trample on your civil rights, invade your
] privacy, re-write fundamental pieces of the constitution, and
] use lies and subterfudge to counter its enemies (including its
] own citizens), I'd say that pretty much _anything_ will be
] considered illegal if they were left to continue their current
] course.

*** I do agree that sometimes havoc is necessary. Personally I don't think this is a cause for it, however women's sufferage and the civil rights movement were valid causes.

*** However, how have our rights been trampled on? How has your privacy been invaded? Answer this on a personal level, then as a whole.

RE: New York Braces for Protests