- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
When people focus on an act, whatever it is, and not the reasons behind it I tend to get a bit suspicious.
Nowhere here has anyone spent time focusing on why it happened. All I see, even from the writer, is, "The Gestapo strikes! OMG! Those bastards!"
It's damned comical in a distinctly hiding-the-facts sort of way and once more shines the spotlight on the whiners whining while the doers do.
So, what were the reasons? If there were no reasons the lawsuits will prevail and cities and police departments will pay through the nose. However, as we all know very well, this rarely happens in "the real world" because these entities usually have just cause.
Everyone knows when a large group of "passionate" left-wingers and anarchists get together to "protest" anything people end up getting hurt and property destroyed.
The right to protest doesn't include terrorizing participants in whatever is being protested. It doesn't include making them feel threatened in any way. It doesn't include you being able to stand on the very steps shouting 2-line political philosophies that will never change anything at all. In fact, there is no right to even be present when protesting. You can easily protest anything from a block or two away and if you don't impede traffic, interfere with police officers, or make a huge mess, you won't even be bothered at all. That's what the right to protest protects. :) Some people just don't get that so you have to take preventative measures ESPECIALLY when the people involved are the same people who have done what I described above AGAIN and AGAIN.
It's simple common sense. We pay our police to enforce the law. When the enemy of the common good is massing on the borders with all their weapons of warfare you have to expect a war is in the future.
So, why did the police do it? Any truthful -even if you don't agree with it- answers?
