G20 Protests Show Preferential Treatment of Right Wing Protesters

[G_j]

http://newsjunkiepost.com/2009/09/27/g20-protests-show-preferential-treatment-of-right-wing-protesters/

G20 Protests Show Preferential Treatment of Right Wing Protesters
By Ole Ole Olson
NEWS JUNKIE POST
Sep 27, 2009


The authorities who protect the establishment’s power have demonstrated something in the last couple weeks: they will cater to right wing protesters while trampling on the rights of left wing protesters. The difference in treatment between the 40k at Glenn Becks 912 rally in DC and the 4000 at the G20 was like day and night.

The recent events in Pittsburgh and elsewhere give us an excellent opportunity to compare and contrast two protest movements in America. The first is the G20 protests, which are closely related to the anti-war protests that began in 2002. The second are the Tea Parties, which are closely linked to the health care protesters.

Let us begin with the G20 protesters on Thursday and Friday. None of the protesters arrive armed. The vast majority were completely peaceful, except for a few anarchists, who broke about a dozen windows and rolled a garbage bin towards officers after they were suddenly given an order to disperse without explanation. They represent a huge umbrella of groups, including labor unions, human rights advocates, anti-war protesters, bank bailout opponents, anti-racism spokesman, environmental advocates, Free Tibet members, anti-corporation protesters, and curious students.

Contrast this with the recent rash of Tea Parties and health care disrupters. The vast majority of these protesters also arrived unarmed, although there have been a few incidents where people have shown up carrying loaded assault rifles, and in 2 cases in Phoenix ended up being members of Pastor Steven Anderson’s flock (the same hate-mongering cleric who issued a Fatwa against Obama and homosexuals). The majority of these protesters are FOX News viewers who voted for Bush, although there are other groups represented, like Ron Paul libertarians, anti-immigration demonstrators, birther conspirators, anti-health care reform protesters, etc.

Now let’s examine how the mentality of the groups protesting. As with the Iraq War protests, dissenting viewpoints were welcomed, although few arrived. One of my friends used to bring cookies for the counter-protesters at the Iraq War demonstrations. The reception counter protesters received at the Tea Parties is quite different as shown in this video where a man carrying a ‘Public Option Now!’ banner had to be escorted through the angry mob by a dozen officers.
..more..

[BlooInBloo]

1. If true, it's not surprising - terrorists protecting other terrorists.

[otohara]

2. Seattle Times Reports Only 30 Protestors @ Glenn Beck Event

I thought, maybe they pulled this number off of The AP who is notorious for under reporting when "liberals" protest and over blowing the "teabaggers" numbers. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2009949568_webbeck26m.html

But no, The AP says protesters numbered 800 and it was the largest protest in history in the small town in WA. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iRNriGY3MaU3TlkygUll5o78elngD9AVFF300

Of course the low number reported inspired the wingnuts to write the nastiest comments on the Seattle Times site - I hope someone in Seattle calls them on this enormous misrepresentation of the facts.

[G_j]

3. the link you posted

says 7000

?

[otohara]

4. Read Again

Beck said 7,000 people attended Saturday's Evergreen Freedom Foundation's "Take the Field with Glenn Beck" at Safeco.

[Kievan Rus]

5. Why? Because Teabaggers are in favor of the corporate agenda

[Blue_Tires]

6. rec'd

[moriah]

7. One difference -- the DC rally had a permit.

Now, this brings up a point that I feel is far too often overlooked -- was the denial of a permit for the march done for a biased reason? Many times the "black bloc" (the anarchists, this isn't about race, it's about dress and color of banners) marches are denied permits where other groups are given permits.

But I'm far more outraged at the police shooting OC canisters onto college dorm's balconies and surrounding people on a college campus -- and giving an order to disperse then not allowing the people to leave. Pittsburgh, with all of its lauded consultation with the NYPD, should have remembered the lawsuit that resulted from the April 7, 2003 protest where peaceful demonstrators (who didn't have to have a permit for their demonstration per NYC law -- they were not in the streets, they were not blocking more than half of the sidewalk as shown by the NYPD's own video of the scene) were surrounded by a line of riot cops and arrested without being allowed to disperse. There is question as to whether there was an order given properly in that case -- many people say they heard no order to disperse. But how can you disperse when you are surrounded by a line of cops with riot shields? Testimony from several of the people arrested that day shows that people on the edge of the crowd asked the officers who were blocking their way to leave if they could leave and were told no.

The city had to pay out $2 million. I hope the NLG works with the students who were arrested Friday night to sue the City of Pittsburgh. Sometimes that's the only way to bring these unconstitutional practices to light.

And myself, I support the right for Glen Beck's followers to protest just as much as I support that right for anti-war and anarchist groups. If I want to have the right to demonstrate lawfully and peacefully without being arrested, I have to give others that same right. I've been hopeful that right-wing and left-wing groups can come together to fight unconstitutional repression of free speech -- I don't know if it will happen, but the first time a Glen Beck rally is shot up with tear gas I bet we will hear a hell of a lot of screaming, and maybe we can take advantage of that to secure the right to peacefully demonstrate for all.