DRUNKEN-ASSHOLE-ONER Posted June 19, 2009 Author Share Posted June 19, 2009 You can't have riots in a litigious society. It's against our true religion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRUNKEN-ASSHOLE-ONER Posted June 19, 2009 Author Share Posted June 19, 2009 Sometimes peaceful demonstrations are better then violent ones Violence only leads to more violence and then the purpose of the riot is lost and only used as fodder for the oppostition. You got to play your cards right when you are trying to take a stand...especially in a country that is so blinded by the state and their propoganda I think the main reason why our government and police are so overconfident that they can do whatever the fuck they want is because they know the most that will happen is some non-violent hippy protests where dudes get locked up on purpose thinking that that's actually accomplishing anything. Revolutions aren't won through non-violence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRUNKEN-ASSHOLE-ONER Posted June 19, 2009 Author Share Posted June 19, 2009 There alot of different aspects to protest. Honestly comming from a very complacent country I can see the benefits of violent protest. They do it in Berlin once a year just because they want to let the authorities know they aren't going to take too much shit. At first I thought this was stupid but having lived there for a while I could see the positive sides to this (police never bothered me or my friends over some stupid shit unlike here where I've been searched several times over nothing and been threatened with bogus fines) in the answer to that question are you (and me since I live in Australia I guess) really that pussy ? The answer is yes. The people who live in the allied nations are some complacent motherfuckers, being as soft and cushy as our lives are, it makes as detached. That's the simple truth. ^Real talk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRUNKEN-ASSHOLE-ONER Posted June 19, 2009 Author Share Posted June 19, 2009 The United States presidential election of 2000 was a contest between Republican candidate George W. Bush, then-governor of Texas and son of former president George H. W. Bush (1989-1993), and Democratic candidate Al Gore, then-Vice President. Bill Clinton, the incumbent President, was vacating the position after serving the maximum two terms allowed by the Twenty-second Amendment. Bush narrowly won the November 7 election, with 271 electoral votes to Gore's 266 (with one elector abstaining in the official tally). The election was noteworthy for a controversy over the awarding of Florida's 25 electoral votes, the subsequent recount process in that state, and the unusual event of the winning candidate having received fewer popular votes than the runner-up.[ our electoral system is rigged from the get. That is why no one went crazy. Only people who arent really politically concious and buy into the farce that the democratic/and republican parties are two totally seperate interests are the ones who were concerned. 04 was just as rigged as this election in Iran. They even tried to say that Bush got the largest popular vote in US history. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrashcat Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRUNKEN-ASSHOLE-ONER Posted June 19, 2009 Author Share Posted June 19, 2009 This just in from Peru! You don't fuck with the Inca! Peru Repeals Decrees behind Clashes http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/19/world/americas/19peru.html CARACAS, Venezuela — Peru’s Congress Thursday overturned two decrees by President Alan García that were aimed at opening large areas of the Peruvian Amazon to logging, dams and oil drilling, but set off protests by indigenous groups this month in which dozens died. (...) The apparent end to the impasse came after at least 24 police officers and 10 civilians were killed in clashes and acts of retaliation in northern Bagua Province, some of Peru’s bloodiest political violence since a two-decade war against Maoist insurgents ended in 2000. NICE!!! <www.12ozprophet.com> You have given out too much Reputation in the last 24 hours, try again later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LEVEL 75 PALADIN Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 AW SHIT MAN ID GIVE YOU PROPS CAUSE CAUSE RIOTS ARE HAPPENING IN PERU BUT I CANT CAUSE I SAT ALL DAY ON THE INTERNET AND SPENT THEM ALREADY BUT JUST SO YOU KNOW I WAS THINKING ABOUT IT AND EVEN TRIED IT BUT IT WONT LET ME SO HERE ILL POST THE MESSAGE 12OZ GAVE ME JUST SO YOU KNOW 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shitting Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 I think DAO is right, this boils down to the siimple fact that on average Iranians are more gangster than North Americans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRUNKEN-ASSHOLE-ONER Posted June 19, 2009 Author Share Posted June 19, 2009 AW SHIT MAN ID GIVE YOU PROPS CAUSE CAUSE RIOTS ARE HAPPENING IN PERU BUT I CANT CAUSE I SAT ALL DAY ON THE INTERNET AND SPENT THEM ALREADY BUT JUST SO YOU KNOW I WAS THINKING ABOUT IT AND EVEN TRIED IT BUT IT WONT LET ME SO HERE ILL POST THE MESSAGE 12OZ GAVE ME JUST SO YOU KNOW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rainbostikuh Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 its sad. what is sad is our lack of education. if we, as in typical americans, understood languages other than english it would be easier to sympathize when we see video like this. the "truth" of pain people feel when dubbed over by a monotoned translator is lost. leaves us uni-lingual people a little numb sometimes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rainbostikuh Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 Neda Soltani on wiki Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R@ndomH3ro Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 I think the main reason why our government and police are so overconfident that they can do whatever the fuck they want is because they know the most that will happen is some non-violent hippy protests where dudes get locked up on purpose thinking that that's actually accomplishing anything. Revolutions aren't won through non-violence. ORLY?? Someone should tell these guys that Gandhi, helped India gain independence through non violent protests Martian Luther, lead the civil rights movement for African Americans through non violent tactics Cesar Chavez, won rights for migrant mexican american workers through non violence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOOGLE? Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 listen to more Discharge bleh political anarchy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LosingMyMind Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 The Orange Revolution was a series of protests and political events that took place in Ukraine from late November 2004 to January 2005, in the immediate aftermath of the run-off vote of the 2004 Ukrainian presidential election which was claimed to be marred by massive corruption, voter intimidation and direct electoral fraud. Kiev, the Ukrainian capital, was the focal point of the movement with thousands of protesters demonstrating daily. Nationwide, the democratic revolution was highlighted by a series of acts of civil disobedience, sit-ins, and general strikes organized by the opposition movement. The protests were prompted by reports from several domestic and foreign election monitors as well as the widespread public perception that the results of the run-off vote of November 21, 2004 between leading candidates Viktor Yushchenko and Viktor Yanukovych were rigged by the authorities in favor of the latter.[1] The nationwide protests succeeded when the results of the original run-off were annulled, and a revote was ordered by Ukraine's Supreme Court for December 26, 2004. Under intense scrutiny by domestic and international observers, the second run-off was declared to be "fair and free". The final results showed a clear victory for Yushchenko, who received about 52 percent of the vote, compared to Yanukovych's 44 percent. Yushchenko was declared the official winner and with his inauguration on January 23, 2005 in Kiev, the Orange Revolution peacefully reached its successful conclusion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R@ndomH3ro Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 The Monday demonstrations in East Germany in 1989 and 1990 (German: Montagsdemonstrationen) were a series of peaceful political protests against the authoritarian government of the German Democratic Republic (GDR) of East Germany that took place every Monday evening. The demonstrations began on 4 September 1989 in Leipzig after regular prayers for peace in the Nikolai Church with parson Christian Führer, and eventually filled the nearby downtown Karl Marx Square (today known again as Augustus-Platz). Safe in the knowledge that the Lutheran Church supported their resistance, many dissatisfied East German citizens gathered in the court of the church, and non-violent demonstrations began in order to demand rights such as the freedom to travel to foreign countries and to elect a democratic government. Informed by (West German) television and friends about the events, people in other East German cities begun repeating the Leipzig demonstration, meeting at city squares on Monday evenings. A major turning point were the events in the West Germany Embassy of Prague, where thousands of East Germans had fled to in September, living there in conditions reminiscent of the Third World. Hans-Dietrich Genscher had negotiated an agreement that allowed them to travel to the West, in trains that had to pass first through the GDR. The speech of Hans-Dietrich Genscher from the balcony was interrupted by a very emotional reaction to his announcement. When the trains passed Dresden central station in early October, police forces had to stop people from trying to jump on the trains. By 9 October 1989, just after the 40th anniversary celebrations of the GDR, what had begun as a few hundred gatherers at the Nikolai Church had swelled to more than 70,000 (out of the city's population of 500,000), all united in peaceful opposition to the regime. The most famous chant became Wir sind das Volk! - "We are the people!", reminding their leaders that a democratic republic has to be ruled by the people, not by an undemocratic party claiming to represent them. Although some demonstrators were arrested, the threat of large-scale intervention by security forces never materialised as local leaders (SED party leader Helmut Hackenberg and Generalmajor Gerhard Straßenburg of the armed police), without precise orders from East Berlin and surprised by the unexpected high number of citizens, shied away from causing a possible massacre, ordering the retreat of their forces. Later, Egon Krenz claimed it was he who gave the order not to intervene. The next week, in Leipzig on 16 October 1989, 120,000 showed up, with military units again being held on stand-by in the vicinity. The next week, the number more than doubled to 320,000, proving that the majority of the population opposed the regime. This pressure led to the Fall of the Berlin Wall on 9 November 1989, marking the imminent fall of the socialist GDR regime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R@ndomH3ro Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 anyways its not violence or non violence that is the problem...the problem is that we as Americans are complacent and wont take a stand in anything that doesnt have a celebrity spokesman...we are sheep REAL TALK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morton Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 The thing I wonder about sometimes is why are Americans so complacent. I think that part of it is that even the poorest people in this country believe that they to may someday be rich so it makes sense to them to protect the interests of the rich. I think that an isolated world view is also part of the picture. The media is another factor of course but sometimes I have a hard time wrapping my head around the point of view of the populace. And while there is certainly a place for mass movement, civil disobedience, legal action and direct action I think that Lenin put it well when he said "Political power grows out the barrel of a gun" . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.