I think you just defended it

Pictoratus......short...insightful and to the point....

You went looking for trouble and you found it. You were successful in your mission. I don't understand what you are upset about.

Protester's as a rule are pretty anal about their cause. Some travel a considerable distance just to be there. They are trying to get the attention of the, "Powers That Be,......not yours.
The way I see it, your group was there to, make light, or their cause.

Put yourself in the line of fire, and your bound to be hit.

Regarding the Police: let the truth be known, most of New York's finest, are sympathetic to the protesters plight.
You see, they are working without a contract and have had some protests of their own.

Protester's as a rule are pretty anal about their cause. Some travel a considerable distance just to be there

Over 80% of those protesters were residents of NY so I guess it depends on what your definition of "considerable distance" is.  You can be passionate and anal about a cause and still be law abiding and respectful.  If you truly believe in free speech, that includes others to have the freedom to voice opposing views, why would you have any problem with anyone else around you?

To you "you got what you deserved" people, do you think it would be justified if delegates physically assaulted Michael Moore at the RNC?  He is there to "report" for USA Today (I believe but could be wrong).  He did get booed but that was the extent even though he laughed at the crowd and gave the cameras the finger.  To use the cop-out tactic of "I bet the others would be as bad", I bet if Rush Limbaugh or some other well-hated-by-liberals right winger acted the same way at the DNC, I bet he would have gotten escorted out or assaulted.

I personally don't delight in the far left being violent and wacked out.  I would have been very pleasantly surprised if the protesters could be civil and actually do their causes some good...but they haven't.  I am not even convinced that many of them even have a cause other than to be a part of history and maybe get to beat up a cop or a right winger.  The fact of the matter is, going to some televised march is a lot more fun than going to a meeting for your local government and doing something constructive.  The same people who travel "great distances" to participate in these "die ins" or whatever are the same people who won't walk across the street to go to a PTA meeting or a city planning meeting.

It bears saying again:

If a bunch of neo-nazis were protesting something and a grew of communists or jewish people began hanging out with them with counter signs, I think it far less likely that they'd violently assault the counter-protesters because they know they're being scrutinized.

But the neo-totalitarian communists, which is what we're talking about at this event (only 34% of them think capitalism is a good thing according to a poll taken) get a free pass.

This has been the case for a long while now.  When I was at college, if a conservative even said a mean thing, he could expect to be disciplined by the university.  But if some far left bomb thrower physically assaulted someone at a rally, you'd get people like Zerg rationalizing it.

Do you think Zerg would be defending the actions of the KKK if they started beating African Americans who happened to be counter protesting near them? I doubt it.

Let's just deal with the reality of things: The far left isn't about freedom or tolerance. They are as totalitarian as the Stalinists before them were. If they had their way, they'd send people like me to a gulag. I see little difference between these protesters and the Bolsheviks of the 1920s. They are driven by their own blind, ignorant ideology and have no tolerance for disent.

what were you protesting again? Were you protesting the protesters? about their right to protest? what exactly?

More than anything else i think this fits into that class of acts known as provocation. of course you're allowed to do it, but why would you want to? I'm guessing to prove to yourself something you have long suspected. That large crowds will often turn to violence when encountered with something they don't like, regardless of their political stripe. Well done for proving something we all know.

What we all should also know is that organising groups, like the A31 Action Coalition, cannot speak for or guarantee the behaviour of a mass of people that for all intents and purposes are largely outside of their control. Groups and coalitions protest only to an extent. On protest day, people protest, not groups and chaos, not order, rules.

Didn't you know that these people are angry, furious actually. Why provoke? why instigate? Why use the behaviour of an emotively charged crowd to attack a political ideology? Because its an easy point. It would be the same as me attacking conservatism on the basis of POW abuse in Iraq.

And Draginol, to hypothetically liken the protests in NY (which calls for peace and an end to bloodshed) to skinhead protests (which would openly call for bloodshed and confrontation) and make a point of ones allowance and the others inspiration of abhorrence is interesting to say the least. I don't have much of a stomach for political correctness, but the progeny of Nazism is something that i would rather be silenced.

Marco

First off, violence is absurd no matter what idiotic group does it, there is no reason for it. The problem with organized marches is that the group as a whole are far more bold then a person alone. When you feel that someone does something wrong to you when you are alone, you tend to back off and walk away. When you are in a group, you feel the need to step up and take things on yourself. If this really did happen to you and your group and there were women that were also being beaten up, I hope this forum is not the only place that you are using to get this message out there. I'm sure FOX news would love to have that footage to show on there since the rest of the other news organizations are so liberal and don't want to show those bad sides of Demo's.

Personally, I'm a independent thinking registered republican. I however will not be voting for Bush in the Fall. I know all about what he is, and seen enough in these years to know he is not the person republicans should be blindly following. I am upset that as a registered repulbican (since my 18th birthday - I'm now 29) we have an imbicile representing our party. He managed to divide our nation in half. Pro-Bush (republicans that will follow anyone that is republican) vs. Anti-Bush (people with common sense and unfortunately those liberal cry babies) There was never a protest of this magnitude when Bush had is first RNC convention, nor was there for Dole in is RNC convention, or even the Bush the first's two RNC conventions. Think about that...

The cameras actually caught a Kerry supporter attacking a guy who was holding a Bush sign.

Ah, liberal tolerance.

The same people who travel "great distances" to participate in these "die ins" or whatever are the same people who won't walk across the street to go to a PTA meeting or a city planning meeting.

Jill
You can believe that !

They are driven by their own blind, ignorant ideology and have no tolerance for disent.

Draginol....
Once again you beat me to the punch with insight...damm you..lol...curses....

....well atleast it was Draginol who got there before me...better to be beaten by a better man...than by a lesser one I always say

Regarding the Police: let the truth be known, most of New York's finest, are sympathetic to the protesters plight.

Insightful

......not quite...while the police and firefighters have been working without a contract for some time....they are not in anyway sympathetic to the useful idiots protesting.....in fact everywhere we went that day New Yorks finest applauded us....and thanked us for stepping up to the plate as it were against them....we thanked them for their service and applauded them on how well they maintained their discipline when all they wanted to do was beat the marchers senseless...but then one would know this if you were there

what were you protesting again? Were you protesting the protesters? about their right to protest? what exactly?

not....
first off we went to counter-protest nearly everything they "stand" for....they assembled to show their opinions...we showed ours...sorry but not liking anothers opinions and then assaulting them because of it is something the right is always accused of but never proven.....the left on the otherhand is always said to assemble "peacefully" but thats never been proven either

It takes a bigger person not to, but not many of them truely exist

Helix

.....in not one instance despite serious provication...not one punch,kick,spitting on, or pushing occur...that cant be said of the other marchers

What's insane here is, many of the talking points on joeuser and other sites have revolved around how the big bad conservatives have restricted free speech by restricting the areas where the protestors can speak freely. And yet I see a lot of liberals here protesting where these people chose to speak. Things that make you go hmmmmm....

There's no defense for the actions of the protestors, frankly, everyone that was seen to participate should be jailed for physical assault. Being a part of a protest is not a license to abuse.

"More than anything else i think this fits into that class of acts known as provocation. of course you're allowed to do it, but why would you want to? I'm guessing to prove to yourself something you have long suspected. That large crowds will often turn to violence when encountered with something they don't like, regardless of their political stripe. Well done for proving something we all know."

And well done to you as well, sir, because hey, we all know it's okay for you and half a dozen of your buddies to beat someone up, as long as he was provoking you first, right? Go back and read the article again, that bit about the waves of black-clad, bandana-over-the-face thugs. That's not individual marchers spontaneously reacting (badly) to provocation, that's a deliberate and pre-planned effort to supress dissent, and you should be absolutely ashamed of yourself for even attempting to act as their apologist, Marco.

"And Draginol, to hypothetically liken the protests in NY (which calls for peace and an end to bloodshed) to skinhead protests (which would openly call for bloodshed and confrontation) and make a point of ones allowance and the others inspiration of abhorrence is interesting to say the least. I don't have much of a stomach for political correctness, but the progeny of Nazism is something that i would rather be silenced."

So, let me see if I've got this straight: you would like to see the people/groups who openly call for bloodshed and confrontation 'be silenced', but you are willing to actually USE bloodshed and confrontation to silence anyone who doesn't agree with your point of view ... Is this another example of the superior intelligence of the Left in action?

Now, as for silenceing Nazis and other unsavoury types: by far the most effective way to deal with lies is not to supress them, but rather to bury them in a flood of truth. Fringe grouops like skinheads are fringe groups because their message is false, and most people are smart enough to see that, given the chance. In the long run, point and giggle is always more effective than "Quiet, you!"

Steve

And Draginol, to hypothetically liken the protests in NY (which calls for peace and an end to bloodshed) to skinhead protests (which would openly call for bloodshed and confrontation) and make a point of ones allowance and the others inspiration of abhorrence is interesting to say the least. I don't have much of a stomach for political correctness, but the progeny of Nazism is something that i would rather be silenced.

Ah I see. Hitler bad. Stalin good. Gotcha.

How about this radical concept: First amendment good. You speak your opinion, I speak mine. People can decide for themselves.