US Congress passes authoritarian anti-protest law

[gug]

JSD - what happens if you are a 'vocal minority' one day, say if Communists were elected to power in the UK? Wouldn't you want the right to protest a Communist government?

As is evidenced on this board I am frequently a minority of one. I protest but I don't go around disrupting other people's lives to do it. They are entirely free to ignore me.

As are you of the occupy movements ?

[JavaScriptDonkey]

I have no problem with the bailouts as they have saved many poor people from destitution and will eventually reap rich rewards for the tax payer.

You're new here (to this planet) right ?

I'm actually quite interested on how you were personally inconvenienced by the occupy LSX protestors. You seem to claim that your life was disrupted in some way (apart from frothing at the mouth during news reports maybe?)

According to your posts above, the "vast majority" have been inconvenienced.
You'll forgive me if i point out that thats bollocks?

I'm just putting myself in the mind of the law makers in the States who passed this bill. This isn't personal.

[gug]

I have no problem with the bailouts as they have saved many poor people from destitution and will eventually reap rich rewards for the tax payer.

You're new here (to this planet) right ?

I'm actually quite interested on how you were personally inconvenienced by the occupy LSX protestors. You seem to claim that your life was disrupted in some way (apart from frothing at the mouth during news reports maybe?)

According to your posts above, the "vast majority" have been inconvenienced.
You'll forgive me if i point out that thats bollocks?

I'm just putting myself in the mind of the law makers in the States who passed this bill. This isn't personal.

Oh dear, how awful that the powers that be are inconvenienced in some way, poor lambs.

[Mr. Fox]

You're new here (to this planet) right ?

Evidently been here long enough to develop 'Stockholm Syndrome'.

[JavaScriptDonkey]

JSD - what happens if you are a 'vocal minority' one day, say if Communists were elected to power in the UK? Wouldn't you want the right to protest a Communist government?

As is evidenced on this board I am frequently a minority of one. I protest but I don't go around disrupting other people's lives to do it. They are entirely free to ignore me.

As are you of the occupy movements ?

Unless you happen to want to use the public facility that they have occupied.

Again, this isn't personal - I don't even live in the States. I just voiced my agreement that such forms of protest should be controlled.

[gug]

As is evidenced on this board I am frequently a minority of one. I protest but I don't go around disrupting other people's lives to do it. They are entirely free to ignore me.

As are you of the occupy movements ?

Unless you happen to want to use the public facility that they have occupied.

Again, this isn't personal - I don't even live in the States. I just voiced my agreement that such forms of protest should be controlled.

I'm just voicing my opinions that those that wish to control us *really* need to be controlled.

So, you're now saying you're arguing for the folks that want to use the "facility" and not the lawmakers?

The idea that some bloody parks temporary use *by the people that pay for it* for use for democratic purposes (protest) is less important that some old dear that wants to walk their dog or the fact that the PTB dont like it is ridiculous.

[JavaScriptDonkey]

You're new here (to this planet) right ?

I'm actually quite interested on how you were personally inconvenienced by the occupy LSX protestors. You seem to claim that your life was disrupted in some way (apart from frothing at the mouth during news reports maybe?)

According to your posts above, the "vast majority" have been inconvenienced.
You'll forgive me if i point out that thats bollocks?

I'm just putting myself in the mind of the law makers in the States who passed this bill. This isn't personal.

Oh dear, how awful that the powers that be are inconvenienced in some way, poor lambs.

But it isn't the PTB. It's ordinary people going about their ordinary lives. I even hate it when the Police outriders stop the traffic to let one of the Windsors sale through.

Egalite for me all the way.

[JavaScriptDonkey]

As are you of the occupy movements ?

Unless you happen to want to use the public facility that they have occupied.

Again, this isn't personal - I don't even live in the States. I just voiced my agreement that such forms of protest should be controlled.

I'm just voicing my opinions that those that wish to control us *really* need to be controlled.

So, you're now saying you're arguing for the folks that want to use the "facility" and not the lawmakers?

The idea that some bloody parks temporary use *by the people that pay for it* for use for democratic purposes (protest) is less important that some old dear that wants to walk their dog or the fact that the PTB dont like it is ridiculous.

So long as their protest isn't disruptive they can both use the park.

Share like we were told at school. Share.

[gug]

I'm just putting myself in the mind of the law makers in the States who passed this bill. This isn't personal.

Oh dear, how awful that the powers that be are inconvenienced in some way, poor lambs.

But it isn't the PTB. It's ordinary people going about their ordinary lives. I even hate it when the Police outriders stop the traffic to let one of the Windsors sale through.

Egalite for me all the way.

HOW ARE ORDINARY PEOPLE GOING ABOUT THEIR ORDINARY LIVES so terribly affected ???

They're more affected by a corrupt government and banking system that mean that their savings are stolen through inflation and they are forced to spend their lives (they're only asset) working hard to pay for 3 houses (the interest on money that was created out of thin air when they took out the mortgage) so that have the "right" to own one (that they dont even ever own as you can no longer have allodial title) - no, hell screw that, they cant use the park, dammit !

[gug]

So long as their protest isn't disruptive they can both use the park.

Share like we were told at school. Share.

You're telling me that the public are being kept out of public places by other members of the public ?

[Mr. Fox]

So long as their protest isn't disruptive they can both use the park.

Share like we were told at school. Share.

Just make sure that old lady has a plastic bag in her pocket, thats all I can say.

[gug]

JSD wins the Louise Mensch award for unnecessary and pointless froth against actual democracy ala occupy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8WvAkhW-XNI

[JavaScriptDonkey]

So long as their protest isn't disruptive they can both use the park.

Share like we were told at school. Share.

You're telling me that the public are being kept out of public places by other members of the public ?

No. You suggested that some random dog walking old lady might be the reason why a protest might be banned from a public park.

I just said that they should share. One should not disrupt the other. The views of one are no more valid or important or urgent than the views of the other.

What I object to is this,

Occupy London: St Paul's Cathedral Closes

[JavaScriptDonkey]

JSD wins the Louise Mensch award for unnecessary and pointless froth against actual democracy ala occupy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8WvAkhW-XNI

Oh look, belittlement and insult from a leftie.

How unusual.

[gug]

So long as their protest isn't disruptive they can both use the park.

Share like we were told at school. Share.

You're telling me that the public are being kept out of public places by other members of the public ?

No. You suggested that some random dog walking old lady might be the reason why a protest might be banned from a public park.

I just said that they should share. One should not disrupt the other. The views of one are no more valid or important or urgent than the views of the other.

What I object to is this,

Occupy London: St Paul's Cathedral Closes

Which, as everybody with a brain commented at the time, was completely unnecessary.

Wierdly, earlier on, you said...

Unless you happen to want to use the public facility that they have occupied.

Which is odd, because St Pauls cathedral (and its courtyard) is actually private property (god owns a lot of stuff it seems).

Still, Its touching that you're concerned for the profits of an organisation (one of the richest in the country) who've made a few quid over the years claiming to both support the underdog and be anti moneylender.
It'd be a bugger if they had to close their doors for a day (even though they didn't actually *have to* and the guy in charge told the protest they could stay).

Lets not let the facts get in the way of a good argument though.



Incidentally, I'm neither left nor right. I dont understand why theres only 2 choices in life - you can limit yourself to false/fake choices all you like.