McCarthyism - erm no Fascism is alive and well

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Scarletwine

New Yorker
Joined
May 1, 2002
Messages
2,753
Location
Outside it's Amerika
The Miami Model

Paramilitaries, Embedded Journalists and Illegal Protests. Think This is Iraq? It's Your Country

By Jeremy Scahill

MIAMI, Nov. 24 (Democracy Now!) We were loading our video equipment into the trunk of our car when a fleet of bicycle cops sped up and formed a semi-circle around us. The lead cop was none other than Miami Police Chief John Timoney. The former Police Commissioner of Philadelphia Timoney has a reputation for brutality and hatred of protesters of any kind. He calls them punks," "knuckleheads" and a whole slew of expletives. He coordinated the brutal police response to the mass-protests at the Republican National Convention in Philadelphia in 2000. After a brief stint in the private sector, Timoney took the post of Miami police chief as part of Mayor Manny Diaz's efforts to "clean up the department."

We had watched him the night before on the local news in Miami praising his men for the restraint they had shown in the face of violent anarchists intent on destroying the city. In reality, the tens of thousands who gathered in Miami to protest the ministerial meetings of the Free Trade Area of the Americas summit were seeking to peacefully demonstrate against what they consider to be a deadly expansion of NAFTA and US-led policies of free trade. There were environmental groups, labor unions, indigenous activists from across the hemisphere, church groups, grassroots organizations, students and many others in the streets. What they encountered as they assembled outside the gates to the building housing the FTAA talks was nothing short of a police riot. It only took a few hours last Thursday before downtown Miami looked like a city under martial law.

On the news, Chief Timoney spoke in sober tones about the tear gas that demonstrators fired at his officers. No, that is not a typo. Timoney said the protesters were the ones launching the tear gas. He also said the demonstrators had hurled "missiles" at the police. "I got a lot of tear gas," Timoney said. "We all got gassed. They were loaded to the hilt. A lot of missiles, bottles, rocks, tear gas from the radicals."

Seeing Timoney up close and personal evokes this image of Mayor Daley at the '68 Democratic Convention ordering his men to shoot protesters on sight. He is that kind of guy.

Back at our car, Timoney hopped off his bike as a police cameraman recorded his every move. It all had the feel of being on an episode of COPS. He demanded the license and registration for the car. Our colleague Norm Stockwell of community radio station WORT in Madison, Wisconsin gave him his license. We informed him we were journalists. One of his men grabbed Norm's press pass, looking it over as though it was a fake. They looked at all of us with nasty snares before getting back on their bikes and preparing to continue on to further protect Miami. Timoney gave us this look that said, you got away this time but I'll be back. You could tell he was pissed off that we weren't anarchists (as far as he knew).

As Timoney was talking with his men, one of the guys on the bikes approached us with a notepad. "Can I have your names?" he asked.

I thought he was a police officer preparing a report. He had on a Miami police polo shirt, just like Timoney's. He had a Miami police bike helmet, just like Timoney's. He had a bike, just like Timoney's. In fact there was only one small detail that separated him from Timoney?a small badge around his neck identifying him as a reporter with the Miami Herald. He was embedded with Chief Timoney.

That reporter was one of dozens who were embedded with the Miami forces (it's hard to call them police), deployed to protect the FTAA ministerial meetings from thousands of unarmed protesters. In another incident, we saw a Miami Herald photographer who had somehow gotten pushed onto the "protesters side" of a standoff with the police. He was behind a line of young kids who had locked arms to try and prevent the police from advancing and attacking the crowds outside of the Inter-Continental Hotel. He was shouting at the kids to move so he could get back to the safe side. The protesters ignored him and continued with their blockade.

The photographer grew angrier and angrier before he began hitting one of the young kids on the line. He punched him in the back of the head before other journalists grabbed him and calmed him down. His colleagues seemed shocked at the conduct. He was a big, big guy and was wearing a bulletproof vest and a police issued riot helmet, but I really think he was scared of the skinny, dreadlocked bandana clad protesters. He had this look of panic on his face, like he had been in a scuffle with the Viet Cong.

Watching the embedded journalists on Miami TV was quite entertaining. They spoke of venturing into Protesterland as though they were entering a secret al Qaeda headquarters in the mountains of Afghanistan. Interviews with protest leaders were sort of like the secret bin Laden tapes. There was something risque, even sexy about having the courage to venture over to the convergence space (the epicenter of protest organizing at the FTAA) and the Independent Media Center. Several reporters told of brushes they had with "the protesters." One reporter was quite shaken after a group of "anarchists" slashed her news van's tires and wrote the word "propaganda" across the side door. She feared for the life of her cameraman, she somberly told the anchor back in the studio. The anchor warned her to be careful out there.

So dangerous was the scene that the overwhelming majority of the images of the protests on TV were from helicopter shots, where very little could be seen except that there was a confrontation between police and "the protesters." This gave cover for Timoney and other officials to make their outrageous and false statements over and over.

Timoney spun his tales of "hard-core anarchists" rampaging through the streets of Miami; "outsiders coming to terrorize and vandalize our city." He painted a picture of friendly restrained police enduring constant attacks from rocks, paint, gas canisters, smoke bombs and fruit. "We are very proud of the police officers and their restraint. Lots of objects were thrown at the police officers," Timoney said. "If we didn't act when we did, it would have been much worse."

It was much worse.

Timoney's Paramilitaries

After last week, no one should call what Timoney runs in Miami a police force. It's a paramilitary group. Thousands of soldiers, dressed in khaki uniforms with full black body armor and gas masks, marching in unison through the streets, banging batons against their shields, chanting, "back... back... back." There were armored personnel carriers and helicopters.

The forces fired indiscriminately into crowds of unarmed protesters. Scores of people were hit with skin-piercing rubber bullets; thousands were gassed with an array of chemicals. On several occasions, police fired loud concussion grenades into the crowds. Police shocked people with electric tazers. Demonstrators were shot in the back as they retreated. One young guy's apparent crime was holding his fingers in a peace sign in front of the troops. They shot him multiple times, including once in the stomach at point blank range.

My colleagues and I spent several days in the streets, going from conflict to conflict. We saw no attempts by any protesters to attack a business or corporation. With the exception of some graffiti and an occasional garbage can set on fire, there was very little in the way of action not aimed directly at the site of the FTAA meetings. Even the Black Bloc kids, who generally have a rep for wanting to smash everything up, were incredibly restrained and focused.

There was no need for any demonstrator to hurl anything at the forces to spark police violence. It was clear from the jump that Timoney's men came prepared to crack heads. And they did that over and over. After receiving $8.5 million in federal funds from the $87 billion Iraq spending bill, Miami needed to have a major combat operation. It didn?t matter if it was warranted.

Miami Mayor Manny Diaz called the police actions last week a model for homeland security. FTAA officials called it extraordinary. Several cities sent law enforcement observers to the protests to study what some are now referring to as the "Miami Model."

This model also included the embedding of undercover police with the protesters. At one point during a standoff with police, it appeared as though a group of protesters had gotten into a brawl amongst themselves. But as others moved in to break up the melee, two of the guys pulled out electric tazers and shocked protesters, before being liberated back behind police lines. These guys, clearly undercover agents, were dressed like any other protester. One had a sticker on his backpack that read: "FTAA No Way."

The IMC has since published pictures of people dressed like Black Bloc kids - ski masks and all - walking with uniformed police behind police lines.

The only pause in the heavy police violence in Miami came on Thursday afternoon when the major labor unions held their mass-rally and march. Led by AFL-CIO President John Sweeney, the march had a legal permit and was carefully coordinated with the police. Many of the union guys applauded the police as they marched past columns of the body-armored officers on break from gassing and shooting unarmed demonstrators.

But as soon as the unions and their permits began to disperse, the police seized the moment to escalate the violence against the other protesters. Fresh from their break during the union rally, Timoney's forces ordered the protesters to clear the area in front of the Inter-Continental. Some of the demonstrators shouted back that they had a right to peaceably protest the FTAA.

Boom. The concussion grenades started flying.

Hiss. The tear gas was sprayed.

Rat-a-tat-tat. The rubber bullets were fired.

Bam, bam. The batons were swinging.

The police methodically marched in a long column directly at the several hundred protesters who believed they had a right to protest, even without John Sweeney at their side. They fired indiscriminately at the crowds. One woman had part of her ear blown off. Another was shot in the forehead. I got shot twice, once in the back, another time in the leg. My colleague, John Hamilton from the Workers Independent News Service was shot in the neck by a pepper-spray pellet - a small ball that explodes into a white powder. After a few moments, John began complaining that his neck was burning from the powder. We doused him in water, but the burning continued. When I tried to ask the police what the powder was, they told me to "mind myself."

I've been in enough police riots to know that when the number of demonstrators dwindles and the sun sets, that's when the real violence begins. Eventually, the police forced the dissipating group of protesters into one of the poorest sections of Miami, surrounding them on 4 sides. We stood there in the streets with the eerie feeling of a high-noon showdown. Except there were hundreds of them with guns and dozens of us with cameras and banners. They fired gas and rubber bullets at us as they moved in. All of us realized we had nothing to do but run. We scattered down side streets and alleys, ducking as we fled. Eventually, we made it out.

After nearly an hour, we managed to find a taxi. We got in and the driver started choking from our pepper-sprayed clothes. She wanted us to get out of the taxi. We apologized for our smell and offered her more money just to get us to the hotel. She agreed.

The Real Crime: Failure to Embed

The next day, we went to a midday rally outside the Dade County Jail where more than 150 people were being held prisoner. It was a peaceful assembly of about 300 people. They sang "We all live in a failed democracy," to the tune of "We all live in a yellow submarine." They chanted, "Free the Prisoners, Not Free Trade," and "Take off your riot gear, there ain't no riot here."

Representatives of the protesters met with police officials at the scene. The activists said they would agree to remain in a parking lot across the street from the jail if the police would call off the swelling presence of the riot police. They reached an agreement?or so the police said.

As the demonstration continued, the numbers of fully armed troops grew and grew. And they moved in from all four sides. They announced that people had 3 minutes to disperse from the "unlawful assembly." Even though the police violated their agreement, the protesters complied. A group of 5 activists led by Puppetista David Solnit informed the police they would not leave. The police said fine and began arresting them.

But that was not enough. The police then attacked the dispersing crowd, chasing about 30 people into a corner. They shoved them to the ground and beat them. They gassed them at close range. My colleague from Democracy Now!, Ana Nogueira, and I got separated in the mayhem. I was lucky to end up on the "safe" side of the street. Ana was in the melee. As she did her job - videotaping the action - Ana was wearing her press credentials in plain sight. As the police began handcuffing people, Ana told them she was a journalist. One of the officers said, "She's not with us, she's not with us," meaning that although Ana was clearly a journalist, she was not the friendly type. She was not embedded with the police and therefore had to be arrested.

In police custody, the authorities made Ana remove her clothes because they were soaked with pepper spray. The police forced her to strip naked in front of male officers. Despite calls from Democracy Now!, the ACLU, lawyers and others protesting Ana's arrest and detention, she was held in a cockroach-filled jail cell until 3:30 am. She was only released after I posted a $500 bond. Other independent journalists remained locked up for much longer and face serious charges, some of them felonies. In the end, Ana was charged with "failure to disperse."

The real crime seems to be "failure to embed."

In the times in which we live, this is what democracy looks like. Thousands of soldiers, calling themselves police, deployed in US cities to protect the power brokers from the masses. Posse Comitatus is just a Latin phrase. Vigilantes like John Timoney roam from city to city, organizing militias to hunt the dangerous radicals who threaten the good order. And damned be the journalist who dares to say it - or film it - like it is.

Jeremy Scahill is a producer and correspondent for the nationally syndicated radio and TV program Democracy Now! He can be reached at jeremy@democracynow.org. For more reports on the FTAA protests, go to: http://www.democracynow.org
 
Last edited:
One question....

Did they have the proper permists to lawfully aseemble?
Were they tresspassing?
 
seeking to peacefully demonstrate against what they consider to be a deadly expansion of NAFTA and US-led policies of free trade

Given the track record of protests during trade discussions, Mr. Scahill must have a broad definition of "peacefully demonstrate".
 
Dreadsox said:
One question....

Did they have the proper permists to lawfully aseemble?
Were they tresspassing?

Obviously I can't count...that was two questions...
 
i think its been proven already that some terrorists are infiltrating some of these 'peaceful protests'..based on data collected.

but ya know those terrorists deserved their rights first, the people at the bottom of the rubble of the 9-11 towers 2nd:up:

db9
 
diamond said:
i think its been proven already that some terrorists are infiltrating some of these 'peaceful protests'..based on data collected.

but ya know those terrorists deserved their rights first, the people at the bottom of the rubble of the 9-11 towers 2nd:up:

db9

What data are you referring to and would you be able to post a link if it's available online? Thanks. :)

Secondly, this idea that protecting the right to demonstrate is protecting the rights of terrorists is both ridiculous and extremely insulting to those who wish to protest peacefully. To suggest that it really just dodging the real issues raised in this thread. :(
 
FizzingWhizzbees said:
Secondly, this idea that protecting the right to demonstrate is protecting the rights of terrorists is both ridiculous and extremely insulting to those who wish to protest peacefully. To suggest that it really just dodging the real issues raised in this thread. :(

I agree. I've been in a gazillion peaceful demonstrations. I'm lucky that they've all been peaceful. I'm concerned about the rights of demonstrators. Who on earth has the "right" to be a terrorist? No one has this right. Terrorists can go to hell.
 
diamond said:
i think its been proven already that some terrorists are infiltrating some of these 'peaceful protests'..based on data collected.

but ya know those terrorists deserved their rights first, the people at the bottom of the rubble of the 9-11 towers 2nd:up:

db9
That's the biggest load of crap I've heard in here for a long time.
 
verte76 said:


I agree. I've been in a gazillion peaceful demonstrations. I'm lucky that they've all been peaceful. I'm concerned about the rights of demonstrators. Who on earth has the "right" to be a terrorist? No one has this right. Terrorists can go to hell.

Exactly.

That is one thing that offended me the most earlier this year-the assumption that by disagreeing with this war I was automatically supporting Saddam and didn't give a damn about those we lost on 9/11. Someone actually accused me of that to me when I was at an anti-war rally.

And that's just complete and utter bullcrap.

Angela
 
Moonlit_Angel said:


Exactly.

That is one thing that offended me the most earlier this year-the assumption that by disagreeing with this war I was automatically supporting Saddam and didn't give a damn about those we lost on 9/11. Someone actually accused me of that to me when I was at an anti-war rally.

And that's just complete and utter bullcrap.

Angela

It's nonsense. I just uploaded a picture of some anti-war demonstrators and their signs were both anti-Bush and anti-Saddam. Dictators and terrorists can go to hell as far as I care. :mad: :mad: :censored: :censored: :censored:
 
i ve seen many links supporting my prior posts re terrorists being at rallies..

to suggest otherwise is to be at the height of naiveness.

people of this mindset would of laughed you out of a room if you would told them terrorists were planning to strike the twin towers in about week at the beginning of sept 2001.:yes:

diamond
 
Last edited:
diamond said:
i ve seen many links supporting my prior posts re terrorists being at rallies..

Then I am sure you wouldn't mind sharing the knowledge with us.
 
Yeah diamond I'd be interested in links. I don't know any terrorists. If I knew any locals who had terrorist sympathies let me tell you I wouldn't demonstrate with them. I'd just as soon go to a Ku Klux Klan rally.:mad: :mad: :censored: :censored: :censored:
 
they were there a few months back.

Im sure the authorities wouldnt want to expose their methods on counter terrorism, and have taken them down.
I did in fact read a handful.

Verte-
Do you think a lone terrorist would volunteer information to you at a rally if he were indeed a genuine terrorist?;)

DB9
 
F.B.I. Scrutinizes Antiwar Rallies
Sun Nov 23, 8:35 AM ET Add Top Stories - The New York Times to My Yahoo!


By ERIC LICHTBLAU The New York Times

WASHINGTON, Nov. 22 The Federal Bureau of Investigation has collected extensive information on the tactics, training and organization of antiwar demonstrators and has advised local law enforcement officials to report any suspicious activity at protests to its counterterrorism squads, according to interviews and a confidential bureau memorandum.

The memorandum, which the bureau sent to local law enforcement agencies last month in advance of antiwar demonstrations in Washington and San Francisco, detailed how protesters have sometimes used "training camps" to rehearse for demonstrations, the Internet to raise money and gas masks to defend against tear gas. The memorandum analyzed lawful activities like recruiting demonstrators, as well as illegal activities like using fake documentation to get into a secured site.



F.B.I. officials said in interviews that the intelligence-gathering effort was aimed at identifying anarchists and "extremist elements" plotting violence, not at monitoring the political speech of law-abiding protesters.


The initiative has won the support of some local police, who view it as a critical way to maintain order at large-scale demonstrations. Indeed, some law enforcement officials said they believed the F.B.I.'s approach had helped to ensure that nationwide antiwar demonstrations in recent months, drawing hundreds of thousands of protesters, remained largely free of violence and disruption.


But some civil rights advocates and legal scholars said the monitoring program could signal a return to the abuses of the 1960's and 1970's, when J. Edgar Hoover was the F.B.I. director and agents routinely spied on political protesters like the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.


"The F.B.I. is dangerously targeting Americans who are engaged in nothing more than lawful protest and dissent," said Anthony Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union (news - web sites). "The line between terrorism and legitimate civil disobedience is blurred, and I have a serious concern about whether we're going back to the days of Hoover."


Herman Schwartz, a constitutional law professor at American University who has written about F.B.I. history, said collecting intelligence at demonstrations is probably legal.


But he added: "As a matter of principle, it has a very serious chilling effect on peaceful demonstration. If you go around telling people, `We're going to ferret out information on demonstrations,' that deters people. People don't want their names and pictures in F.B.I. files."


The abuses of the Hoover era, which included efforts by the F.B.I. to harass and discredit Hoover's political enemies under a program known as Cointelpro, led to tight restrictions on F.B.I. investigations of political activities.


Those restrictions were relaxed significantly last year, when Attorney General John Ashcroft (news - web sites) issued guidelines giving agents authority to attend political rallies, mosques and any event "open to the public."


Mr. Ashcroft said the Sept. 11 attacks made it essential that the F.B.I. be allowed to investigate terrorism more aggressively. The bureau's recent strategy in policing demonstrations is an outgrowth of that policy, officials said.


"We're not concerned with individuals who are exercising their constitutional rights," one F.B.I. official said. "But it's obvious that there are individuals capable of violence at these events. We know that there are anarchists that are actively involved in trying to sabotage and commit acts of violence at these different events, and we also know that these large gatherings would be a prime target for terrorist groups."


Civil rights advocates, relying largely on anecdotal evidence, have complained for months that federal officials have surreptitiously sought to suppress the First Amendment rights of antiwar demonstrators.


Critics of the Bush administration's Iraq (news - web sites) policy, for instance, have sued the government to learn how their names ended up on a "no fly" list used to stop suspected terrorists from boarding planes. Civil rights advocates have accused federal and local authorities in Denver and Fresno, Calif., of spying on antiwar demonstrators or infiltrating planning meetings. And the New York Police Department this year questioned many of those arrested at demonstrations about their political affiliations, before halting the practice and expunging the data in the face of public criticism.


The F.B.I. memorandum, however, appears to offer the first corroboration of a coordinated, nationwide effort to collect intelligence regarding demonstrations.


The memorandum, circulated on Oct. 15 just 10 days before many thousands gathered in Washington and San Francisco to protest the American occupation of Iraq noted that the bureau "possesses no information indicating that violent or terrorist activities are being planned as part of these protests" and that "most protests are peaceful events."


But it pointed to violence at protests against the International Monetary Fund (news - web sites) and the World Bank (news - web sites) as evidence of potential disruption. Law enforcement officials said in interviews that they had become particularly concerned about the ability of antigovernment groups to exploit demonstrations and promote a violent agenda.





"What a great opportunity for an act of terrorism, when all your resources are dedicated to some big event and you let your guard down," a law enforcement official involved in securing recent demonstrations said. "What would the public say if we didn't look for criminal activity and intelligence at these events?"

The memorandum urged local law enforcement officials "to be alert to these possible indicators of protest activity and report any potentially illegal acts" to counterterrorism task forces run by the F.B.I. It warned about an array of threats, including homemade bombs and the formation of human chains.

The memorandum discussed demonstrators' "innovative strategies," like the videotaping of arrests as a means of "intimidation" against the police. And it noted that protesters "often use the Internet to recruit, raise funds and coordinate their activities prior to demonstrations."

"Activists may also make use of training camps to rehearse tactics and counter-strategies for dealing with the police and to resolve any logistical issues," the memorandum continued. It also noted that protesters may raise money to help pay for lawyers for those arrested.

F.B.I. counterterrorism officials developed the intelligence cited in the memorandum through firsthand observation, informants, public sources like the Internet and other methods, officials said.

Officials said the F.B.I. treats demonstrations no differently than other large-scale and vulnerable gatherings. The aim, they said, was not to monitor protesters but to gather intelligence.

Critics said they remained worried. "What the F.B.I. regards as potential terrorism," Mr. Romero of the A.C.L.U. said, "strikes me as civil disobedience."
 
diamond said:
Verte-
Do you think a lone terrorist would volunteer information to you at a rally if he were indeed a genuine terrorist?;)

DB9

Well, I don't suppose anyone would say "I'm a terrorist" or "I'm a member of Al-Qaeda". But if he (I cannot imagine a woman symphathizing with bin Laden) said any of these shocking things terrorists say about women or Jews or whatever we'd tell him to get the hell out of town or contact the local KKK branch and tell them he's available scum.:mad: :mad: :censored: :censored: :censored: After all they just bombed synagogues, banks and consulates in Istanbul, much like the KKK bombed African American churches here in Birmingham.:mad:
 
Last edited:
Forgive me?

You must be feeling better, your spunk is returning. I am v. happy for you, welcome back! :)
 
diamond said:
i ve seen many links supporting my prior posts re terrorists being at rallies..

to suggest otherwise is to be at the height of naiveness.

people of this mindset would of laughed you out of a room if you would told them terrorists were planning to strike the twin towers in about week at the beginning of sept 2001.:yes:

diamond

And will these links back your ridiculous statement of "but ya know those terrorists deserved their rights first, the people at the bottom of the rubble of the 9-11 towers 2nd". Do you honestly think anyone believes that?
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


And will these links back your ridiculous statement of "but ya know those terrorists deserved their rights first, the people at the bottom of the rubble of the 9-11 towers 2nd". Do you honestly think anyone believes that?

I hope not.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


". Do you honestly think anyone believes that?

based on some of your posts and threads like Klaus- "The forgotten ones.." -you fellas appear to be on your way...;):up:



dont worry i say police the rallies and nobody is forgotten at gitmo..:)

DB9
terrorism.jpg
 
Last edited:
Your definition of the term terrorist would really be an interesting thing to read, diamond.

Keep in mind that the American Revolution started out as terrorist acts against England. The "Boston Tea Party" is a prime example of terrorism. Colonial revolutionaries sneaked aboard an English Tea Merchant Ships, where they threw hundreds if not thousands of dollars worth of tea into the Atlantic Ocean. Americans today think of that incident as a stride to freedom, but the English look at it as the beginning of countless terrorist acts.

In all too many places basic human rights are suppressed. The laws are made by a minority, sometimes with no pretence of discussion at all. The most extreme form of government terrorism is what people might call a "reign of terror." This phrase was first used in the French Revolution, during which the Revolutionary Tribunal sent increasing numbers of the people to their death (1793). As panic and tension built up, terror was the order of the day. Any suspected "enemy of the people" (persons against the revolution) could be round up and often ended their life under the guillotine.

The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by the United States can be interpreted as acts of terrorism. Admiral William D. Leahy, Chief of Staff to the President Truman, remarked: "My own feeling was that in being the first to use it we had adopted the ethical standards common to barbarians in the dark ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion." The atomic bombs used by the American Armed Forces struck fear into every nation on every continent.

The word terrorism has many definitions. Several of the meanings depict all terrorists as evil villains that love death. Others make terrorists out of almost everyone. The multitudes of meanings even makes the practitioners contemplate if they are terrorist or not.

Defined by hyperdictionary.com, a terrorist is

[n] a radical who employs terror as a political weapon
[adj] characteristic of someone who employs terrorism (especially as a political weapon); "terrorist activity"

Alternatively, some people condemn any violence by a non-governmental entity - whatever the target - as terrorism, and approvingly label any action by a sovereign country's military forces - again, whatever the target - as "military strikes" or the like.

In determining whether an act is "terrorist" or not, it would be more useful to eliminate subjective evaluations of the goals of the violence.
 
Hiphop-
Are suggesting that the foot soldiers of Al Queda detained at Gitmo do not support the events of 9-11?

DB9
 
Last edited:
Gotcha diamond. I'm currently doing a tribute thread to the Istanbul bombing victims on PLEBA (pics showing Bono making the peace sign and working for peace). I also have a 9/11 memorial on my great big history site, and flag stickers in tribute on my car and on my mirror in my bedroom.
 
To Equate the Boston Tea Party with 9/11 Sickens me and clearly demonstrates the how far people will go to attempt to make this country look bad.

There were NO deaths involved in the Boston Tea Party not a single one. The PATRIOTS who boarded each ship did not steal a single drop of tea. They respectfully did not harm the ships in the harbor that night, and asked the captains to open to holds so as to not cause damage to the property other than the tea. Before they left the ships, they had people checking to make certain that NO ONE WAS STEALING the TEA every man leaving the ships emptied their boots and pockets to show that no tea was stashed within. This was in protest of ECONOMIC TAXATION. It was also after meetings petitions and assemblys for the right to be heard had been rejected time and again.

For you to compare this to Al-Qaeda, and 9-11 is wrong. Al-Qaeda had a ten year history of attacks against the United States. They killed innocent civilians and based on the short selling that went on in the markets that day it is very clear that they made PROFITS off of the actions they took. It was not just about killing to make a statement.

If you care to debate the American Revolution with me I will be more than happy to do so with you, but there is NO WAY you can equate the BOSTON TEA PARTY with AL-Qaeda and 9/11.
 
Back
Top Bottom