Police Brutalize Anti-War Protesters in Washington

21 Comments

1. Oh, absolutely. Without outside perspective, we’re just stuck in Plato’s cave. The problem I have with all this impeachment talk is that, unfortunately, a lot of people aren’t thinking about reasons for it other than the fact that they dislike Bush and are tired of hearing about the war.

   I guess I wrote one “f-word” too many for people to see that I did, indeed, have a point.

   Take all the time you need, Mikael. I’ll keep an eye out.

2. Josh, Thanks. You are good to your word to respond. I, likewise will need some time to let your thoughts rattle around in my little pea brain before I respond rather than shooting from the hip.

   Sometime in the next couple of weeks I will be meeting with my Representative – Keith Ellison – asking him why impeachment is still off the table and not on the floor of the House of Representatives where I believe it belongs. It is important to hear many perspectives before, during and after latching onto a course of action.

   I am happy with the plethora of investigations occuring concurrently now (92 at last count) concerning the improprieties of the Bush Administration, and I am waiting to hear where they will all lead.

   Give me a couple of days before fully responding…

3. As you can probably imagine, the past few days weren’t quite enough time for me to research every issue to its depths. What I’ve come up with is my attempt at a rational argument against impeachment because the evidence is not sufficient enough to make a conviction certain and our government can’t afford to waste the billions it would take to try our President and Vice President.

   I realize this isn’t a popular idea, but bear with me.

   I don’t have all the answers to argue against these claims. I admitting that I am no expert. I’m not a lawyer and I can only imagine what a field-day the defense attorneys would have poking holes in the prosecution’s case. Imagine the skill of the counsel of the President of the United States. These are hand-picked, highly-seasoned courtroom warriors who will not make piddling errors that cost them victory.

   In our country, the burden of proof is always on the accuser. President Bush’s lawyers will eat these allegations up and use anti-war placards to pick their teeth. They won’t even spoil their dinner.

   But that’s not the only advantage they have over your stock-piles of evidence. I’m willing to wager the defense counselors will have access to classified material; you only have words spoken in public and declassified material deemed insensitive enough to share with any Tom, Dick or Harry. Do you REALLY think there aren’t good reasons why we can’t just log-on to CIA.gov and find out what our intelligence looks like? Are you going to argue that our national security is a paltry price to pay to settle your conscience over a war you’re not even fighting in? How presumptuous. And foolish.

   I’ll begin with the allegation of Illegal Detention, because it’s the easiest to refute.

   The website claims that Jose Padilla’s detainment was illegal and unconstitutional. Wrong.

   According to the AUMF — authorized by Congress — President Bush was legally entitled to detain him because he was considered an “enemy combatant.” I can hear the dissent now: “But he was a citizen!” Nope. Enemy combatant. Want a basis for comparison? Remember Timothy McVeigh? Sorry, but no law was broken here.

   Now let’s talk about the allegations of Illegal Spying.

   Are you aware that the “spying” going on didn’t involve the content of the correspondence? President Bush wasn’t sitting in the Oval Office listening to you talk to Marty about scoring some bud and banging that hot chick in PolySci — the NSA was watching who called who. If I call a suspected Al-Qaeda terrorist, the NSA’s going to think to tail me. How does this not make sense?

   How is that any different from Megan’s Law? It’s the same principle: watching what a known “bad guy” does will lead you to other bad guys. Do you think child predators deserve all their freedoms after they’re convincted? Do you think murderers should have their Second Amendment rights reinstated? If your family has ever been victimized, I’m sure you’d be singing a different tune about who deserves what.

   I don’t know about you, but I’d rather bear the embarrassment of having the NSA know I’m calling for phone sex than to have them let a jihad be planned over Verizon’s network. Not that I call for phone sex or anything….*shifty eyes*

   Why should anti-war groups be surprised that the government stops by their website to take a peek and see what they’re up to? If you create a seditious group and relate yourself to Islam in the wake of 9/11 (referring to the second item of the “Spying Evidence”), why would you be shocked to find the Feds poking around? I don’t get the righteous indignation. It actually pisses me off that they couldn’t put together why they were being surveyed.

   If there was any illegal spying, why would there be declassified memos circulating on the Internet for all to see? Do you think they’d let it be known that they were spying if it wasn’t legal? Maybe you’re confusing something being illegal with something being plain offensive. I mean, this is the kind of thing shredders are for. Don’t be stupid.

   Another disturbing allegation was the purported violation of the Geneva Convention.

   I saw a lot of grave atrocities, but most of it was a bunch of horseshit. As I read about some of the “torture” inflicted on the EPWs, I couldn’t help but remember my experiences in boot camp. They don’t have it much worse and I and thousands of young men and women like me volunteer to go there every year. There were some interrogation methods I found to be extreme, but I was likewise reminded of SERE (Survival Evasion Resistance Escape) school, which is a requirement for special operators, pilots, certain medical personnel, and other high-risk military personnel. Most of the information on SERE is classified, and a lot of what happens in boot camp isn’t covered in the recruiting brochures, but it’s the same idea. Interrogation isn’t meant to be a user-friendly, culturally-sensitive endeavor. Get out of your head the notion that we can get what we need from them by stroking their hand and telling them we love them. Our men are being dragged through the street, mutilated, decapitated, tortured to death, raped, beaten — and these people are in a huff because our enemy might have been treated roughly? Give me a fucking break.

   But if you really want to impeach someone for all this — if you just have that hankering to watch your distaste for the war burn in effigy — look to Donald Rumsfeld. If you know anything about management, you know that Rumsfeld had more of a grip on the details of this situation than the President. Everybody knows this. Did anyone else think Rumsfeld’s resignation to come as a bit of a blow?

   Chase him; the President is ultimately “responsible”, but a parent shouldn’t be put in detention because of where their kid put the class pet. President Bush can easily claim that he wasn’t fully aware of these situations and it’ll be nigh impossible to prove otherwise. He may have had his hand in some of this, but we’ll never know. Remember: legality does not equate to morality. Moving along…

   Finally, we have the accusation of perpetrating Illegal War.

   To quote Full Metal Jacket: It’s a shit sandwich and we’re all gonna have to take a bite.

   Your beloved Congress has just as much on their conscience as the President. While you may be upset that Mr. Bush is a pugnacious blowhard, that’s not an impeachable offense. All the mention of him saying “Fuck Saddam” may give you a bad taste in your mouth, but it gave a lot of people a big woody when our towers will still smoldering in our memory. You can call him an opportunist, you can conjecture that there was some sort of conspiracy, and you can protest to cops that have nothing to do with it, but almost all of these options make you look like a total douchebag — and they’re not incriminating. They’re irrelevant. And while they may make pretty banners, they won’t hold up in a court. Not for a second.

   I would think our intel operatives had a better idea of what really happened during the weapons inspections than Joe Schmoe in Boise, Idaho. I know that putting too much faith in a government is a dangerous thing; I’ve read and enjoyed plenty Orwell to not be entirely content. But, level with me here: if you were checking an Iraqi compound for weapons and they told you, “You can go anywhere but the closet; don’t go in the closet until we let you,” wouldn’t you be a bit concerned? Just a tad? When declassified memos tell you that some documents may have been falsified, don’t you think the same could be true for any of the “evidence” you’re trying to use to indict the President? How can we be so sure that Iraq had no ties to Al-Qaeda, especially when there were training camps in the Al-Anbar province that U.S. forces raided in 2004? Al-Qaeda’s had a presense in Iraq since the Gulf War, but we can’t see the ties between them? Come on.

   A great deal of these accusations depend on intelligence that, alas, we have no access to. This is for our governmental leaders to duke out amongst themselves. Our Congress is led now by the democrats, but we’re still stick in the Middle East. Can you really keep blaming the President? Do you think maybe it’s necessary for our forces to stay there until — oh, I dunno, the experts think it’s wise to debark? If Congress wants to investigate the events, they will. But they’re not listening to Tacoma, Washington or even Washington, D.C. protestors. All the protestors are doing is clogging the streets so I can’t get to work on time and distracting police while people got robbed for their iPods on the Metro. And they do this while wearing their badge of smug moral superiority. I’m calling their bullshit. Who likes war? I can promise you I don’t. I don’t like hearing about good people dying; anyone who does is a monster.

   Do I think the President’s methods have been morally sound? No. But the President isn’t alone. He’s got a lot of people under and alongside him who are equally at fault for a lot of things. This has been a botched operation and scapegoating the President because people don’t like the way he talks is the easy way out and it’s a crock of shit, plain and simple. Is public opinion going to be relevant in a court of law, when there are millions of taxpayer dollars and thousands of government service manhours being devoted to an investigation with shoddy evidence supporting weak accusations?

   Absolutely not.

4. Alec,

   I have never been tasered nor have I been shot at point blank range with ‘non-lethal’ ammunition. I would guess that anyone suffering either would feel he or she had been brutalized – especially if they didn’t feel it was warranted.

   According to eye witnesses, the person arrested was tazed three times will being held to the ground by multiple officers after having been shot.

   If someone forcefully violated you in that way, might you describe it as your having been brutalized?

   Thanks for checking in.

5. Excellent Josh. We look forward to the exchange. In the meantime I did look up “regime”. Although it simply means “system of government or rule” it is tied in often with “fascist regime” or “dictatorial regime”. I do happen to think that although neither of these fit the Bush Administration completely, they are accurate in description of the direction this Administration was taking us.

   I guess it is a “guilt by association” connection for the most part. I think it is a good fit.

6. I won’t enter the fray of the conversation, but I will say the word ‘brutalize’ is a little too much. I’m glad people are protesting, but ‘brutalized’ is not being pushed by a cop because you’re acting like an asshole. Brutalized is waking up with people in hoods burning a cross on your front lawn.

7. You’re clearly an educated person and you obviously have more thought invested in these pursuits than the average lunkhead fan of Michael Moore. I personally agree with most of what you wrote. However, I always become annoyed when I see people refer to the Bush administration as “the regime”, because people have no idea what actual tyranny is like. No one in this country knows what it’s like to be afraid of being dragged into an alley and shot for having a seditious opinion. It irks me that people feel oppressed when they barely know the meaning of it. As Alexander Solzhenitsyn wrote in One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, “How can you expect a man who’s warm to understand a man who’s cold?”

   Since you’re smart enough to ask for facts and a more sophisticated position, I’ll give it to you. Though I’m currently swamped by a bevy of books to read and a test to cram for (not to mention distracted by the Internet sites that bring me to hard spots like this — damn you, Reddit), I’m going to take the next couple days and formulate a response that you deserve.

   Please be patient; I’ll be back shortly. On my honor, I will be back.

8. Sooo Josh…

   Would you like to pick out one of the examples from our evidence page of the criminality of the Bush Administration that you wish to dispute?

9. One of my jobs as a professional actor is that I am a Crisis Intervention Training role-player for police officers in training to become better equipped to handle emergency situations such as jumpers, self-immolaters (going to burn themselves alive), those attempting ‘suicide-by-cop’, those suffering from amphetamine psychosis or other delusionary situations, having PTSD flashbacks, etc.

   I am 48 years-old. I wear the dog tag that my father was wearing while he was stationed in the Phillipines in 1945 awaiting the orders to invade Japan when the bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

   Last October 5th at the Minneapolis Federal Building rally that we of IfP had organized, in front of over a thousand people who had come to protest the War in Iraq and to call for the impeachment of President Bush and Vice President Cheney, I took the microphone before the march down Hennepin Avenue and told everyone that we were intent on rallying peacefully and to do otherwise would be hypocritical for a peace rally and for a rally of opposition to the lawlessness of the Bush Administration.

   (The facts of that lawlessness are indisputable at this point for those who have taken the time to read our evidence pages, or have been researching deeply into what the Bush Administration has been up to the last few years. Many of the details of criminality were recently confirmed by the Libby Trial. Intentionally revealing classified information is against the law – possibly treasonous).

   I told the marchers that if they saw anyone doing anything illegal, to stand back so they wouldn’t be implicated and to notify the authorities immediately. I told them how the Minneapolis Police had been completely professional and that we had cooperated with each other in every possible way and to just do their patriotic duty to express dissent of the criminality of the Bush Regime and to let the officers do their job to protect the community and property from harm.

   Jodin then spoke and mentioned the other half of that equation, which is that if anyone was arrested or treated inappropriately in any manner by the police to not resist, to ask for an attorney and to ask witnesses to call the ACLU with their testimony.

   The rally went incredibly smoothly. There were no arrests and there was no violence or vandalism. The system works just fine if dissenters are lawful and respectful and if the police are also lawful and respectful. Each of us has a role to play and if we prove ourselves to be capable of decency.

   The system begins to break down when either or both of these groups decide that the law has no bearing on themselves and that they can do what they please to pursure their own particular agenda.

   America is a nation of laws. No American is above the law.

   When protestors break the law, they should be held accountable for their actions.

   When police officers break the law, they also should be held accountable.

   Our point, and the reason that Impeach for Peace came to be is no different. President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have broken the law. Not just once or twice, although that would be reason enough for them to be held accountable, but dozens of times in multiple areas.

   Anyone choosing to defend them for their crimes, please do so and best of luck, but you will have a much greater chance of being effective if you prove yourself capable of doing so intelligently and backed up by more facts and less vitriol.

10. Right on, Josh.
    I salute your willingness to take an unpopular stance, to defend it with logic, and to deconstruct the opposing arguments when they have been so poorly constructed in the first place. A little less of the “fuck” will improve your clarity, I think.
    All you other people: take a moment to think. Be careful to know the difference between sentiment and logic. Try not to let your fear and pain cloud your ability to identify the salient issues, educate yourself, and then come to an informed opinion. Stay focused! Re-read your argument as if you didn’t already agree with it.
    Oh, and thanks for the entertainment.
    I’ll save you the trouble: “arrogant bitch”. Thank you. But you know I’m right.

11. To moy hau:

    The sad thing is, you probably think you’re clever.

    To Jodin Morey:

    Before I clarify my argument to you, I’d like to thank you for being the only sensible, rational person to respond to my comment. It gives me hope to see someone who can offer something other than pitiful insults and fallacious argument.

    I think you missed the point of my comment. It’s not that I think people shouldn’t celebrate that they’re free to express themselves; it’s that I wish they’d think for themselves before they did. I agree that my initial post was full of assumption, but I keep in mind the Mark Twain quote: “All generalizations are false, including this one.” There’s no way to make any comment on an issue like this without offending someone. Evidently, tact wasn’t among my concerns at the time, and it still isn’t.

    What I said in my comment was completely true: “Morality does not equal legality.”

    A skimmed over those “impeachable offenses” and while I find a lot of his “misleading” and “implying” to be scummy and offensive to my concept of morals, he hasn’t broken the law. Most people (even the ones who portray
    themselves as being politically-minded) forget the idea of checks and balances.

    President Bush can do nothing without Congress’s support. People think that’s a bunch of bullshit because the Congress was primarily conservative throughout his presidency, but that’s politics. That’s the way it works. You might find Bush to be an unctuous fucking snake, but that’s politics and he’s done nothing illegal.

    Therefore, there isn’t going to be any impeachment. Sorry.

    People forget that FDR used signing statements to create the Japanese internment camps — and the Supreme Court concurred with his action. If the rest of our government cares to do something to stop Bush, they will. That’s what they’re there for. But, if they don’t, it’s because they agree to the course of action. If you don’t like it, then I’m sorry for you, but that’s just too fucking bad. You can’t impeach him because you disagree with him. Finally, please be careful when choosing your words. Saying that I was “restricting” free speech isn’t quite the same as saying I was criticizing peoples’ use of it. There’s a difference.

    Thanks again for being the one reasonable person to respond to my comment. If there’s one intelligent person around, it almost makes it worth listening to the other eight who have no idea what they’re saying. Almost.

    To Homeland Conspiracy:

    Hey, that’s where it’s at. Go ahead and take partial quotes and use them out of context to support whatever position you were told is the right one. It doesn’t matter if there were any valid points made — just ignore anything like that and keep arguing. Fight the power! Fucking idiot.

    To weefs:

    Like you know anything about prison besides what you’ve seen on Oz. You’re clearly among the poor bastards who are offended by any form of authority or order. I’m sorry that you’re clearly unfamiliar with concepts like respect and community. I’ll bet you’re wearing a Che Guevara shirt as you read this. I can hear Rage Against the Machine blaring in your room. I’ll bet it’s never occured to you to thank a police officer for giving a purpose to your life; without him, you’d have nothing to do. Keep fighting the man, because that’s what makes
    you “gnarly” and “unique.”

    To Enema Combatant:

    Wait a sec, did you just say “You’re welcome” to me because I’m an American? As if you had anything to do with my family living here when I was conceived? Are you saying it’s because of you that there’s a United States?

    How is it, pray tell, that you can make a digression in the second sentence of your argument? Looks to me like you read “I digress” somewhere, thought it looked smart, and decided to use it to look smart yourself one day.
    Congratulations on it backfiring on you.

    But let’s get to the meat of the matter, shall we?

    I’m disheartened to see that you think that protest actually did something besides waste state revenue on providing police protection. What effect are they trying to have? Are they trying to get the attention of their legislators? Why don’t they take time to look at the issues and compose ONE logical, thought-out,
    comprehensive opinion of their own and send it to their representatives? It costs a stamp. But even if they weren’t satisfied with just sending a letter, our Bill of Rights duly protects our right to assemble, and I think that’s a beautiful thing.

    But tell me what they were trying to prove by screaming at the cops. You explain that to me and we’ll be one step closer to a mutual understanding. Tell me why they even needed to SPEAK to the officers. They could have let the officers stand by and do their job, and carried on with the protest they purportedly came there to do, but didn’t. Could it be that people don’t do this because they’re BORED by that idea? Maybe they’re inspired by the civil rights movement in the ’60s and wanted to be like their parents. Maybe they’re trying to get attention; I don’t know. What I do know is that screaming the word “peace” in someone’s face is sending a mixed signal. I really wonder how many of these people weren’t there just to get out of their dorm rooms.

    I have a feeling you read maybe five words of my initial comment and decided you understood the whole of it. You missed a lot, obviously. Like the part where I said I volunteered to go to Iraq myself. I would think it wouldn’t be too hard to infer that — and this is me having outrageous confidence in peoples’ ability to think — maybe I’m in the Armed Forces? Y’know, the same Armed Forces you claim to be discharged from, but spend half your missive talking shit about? I mean, what do you want from me to make my comment valid to you?
    Let’s disregard that there may have been an argument and a clear train of thought in that comment — let’s worry about my accomplishments and my attention to civic duty. Shall I tell you about the times I’ve helped blind people find the escalator on public transit? Or held doors open for elderly women? Or taught my sister how to do arithmetic when she was having trouble?

    Fuck, is THAT how I’m supposed to support my assertions? I’ve had it wrong all along.

    I know this is crazy, because I don’t believe in clairvoyance myself, but I can actually SEE you hitting the “Submit Comment” button and leaning back in your chair with your arms folded as if you’ve accomplished something. How embarrassing for you.

    To Billy Bob:

    Hey, I like the reference to Nazi Germany — even if you spelled it wrong.

    Everybody knows that whenever you don’t have any valid points to make in an argument, the next best thing is to associate the other person with Hitler, fundamentalist Christians (oops, I’m agnostic), those idiots arguing about the Pledge of Allegience (oops, I don’t give a shit; there’s more important things to worry about), or any of the gutless Bush supporters (oops, I don’t agree with most of Bush’s policies — especially foreign.)

    I think I know what happened here, Billy Bob. You noticed I was angry with a crowd of quasi-leftists protestors and you immediately assumed I was a conservative. BUZZZZZ!!! Wrong. You’ve provided an excellent example of what drives me nuts about bi-partisan politics — too much time spent bashing the other party and not enough time looking at the issues and coming up with a solution. Good job, buddy. Keep that American spirit alive.

    To Bob Reynolds, Ph.D.:

    I’m glad you made it clear that you’re a doctor. Knowing a person’s educational background is necessary when judging the validity of their opinions. Nevermind that you made no rebuttal. The only good defense is lousy insults. There’s more living proof that education does not equate to intelligence.

    To Aragon:

    Well, no, not exactly. I certainly think the police officers would have been justified in using non-lethal means to bring their crowd into some sort of order. I mean, did you not notice that there was almost no protesting going on — but a lot of harassment? Police officers are entitled to the same basic rights those
    protestors are. If the state brought in a slick-ass lawyer, I’m willing to bet they could get some of those people for assaulting a police officer. Would it be morally sound? I dunno, that depends on your concept of morals. Would it be legally sound? I dunno, that depends on the lawyer’s skill and the judge’s mood.

    Did you know that “assault” includes taking a threatening stance?

    False imprisonment, my ass. There was nothing peaceable about that protest and I’m a little annoyed that those people acted like that and then had the cojones to complain about police brutality.

12. Ah, this really sucks. You guys have it too good with Tasers and rubber bullets these days. Give me the good old days when the police would shoot you little bastards and club the ones that fell down running.

13. People:
    Please leave Josh alone. He was up late drinking his Kool-Aid and had to have something to do. There is no law that you must be intelligent to make comments on the web. Otherwise . . . well, there would be no Josh to kick around any more.

14. hey Josh! You wouldn’t be a member of “Freerepublic” would you? Just remember, more guns will keep us safe from these spineless hippy dippies who are conspiring to destroy our christian nation, and turn us into ELF terrorists, living on tofu and alfalfa sprouts, all the while committed to taking “under God” out of the pledge of allegiance, and refusing to acknowledge the PROVEN fact that President Bush is carrying out the WILL OF GOD. SIG HEIL!!!!

15. Josh, et al.:

    You are welcome. For being American. Now, thankfully, I can say shut the fuck up.

    But, wait, I digress. I don’t disagree with *all* of your “I’ve got a fucking huge bone to pick — everyone hear me as I RAOWR!!!!” issues, but I do have a couple:

    * Freedome of speech is important to use, and some people need to practice it more than others
    * We have our current (better than before) Civil rights because “mommy and daddy’s little trustfund kids” tried their hand at this shit in the 60’s and 70’s — and to give them credit, alot has been done… sometimes it just needs practice, my esteemed knowledge-spewer
    * Are you self righteous? What in the *FUCK* have you done, EVER, to better someone’s life? These people are fucking PROTESTING Josh — does that sink in? Yes, PROTESTING. I don’t think they can afford the fucking ticket to Tikrit and I bet you they really want to avoid the bullet-hosing they’d get from Crackwater or our meth-snorting Armed forces.

    Let me ingress, a bit more:

    * Shut the fuck up on shutting the fuck up: no one hates a fucking bitcher more than the bitchers. Are you a card holder? Surely, you must be.
    * Who in the FUCK do you think you are judging the motives of honest people? While that is your perogative, and surely you have others, I’d like to think these are not Women-robbing, baby-shooting, speed-freaked fighter pilots with hard-ons for friendly fire incidents or anything other such shit. I’d like to believe, just a little, that these folk are honest, hard-working people who are sick of HAVING PEOPLE KILLED EACH AND EVERY GOD DAMNED DAY FOR A FUCKING POINTLESS WAR, Josh.

    Does any of that make sense?

    I speak from the truth: Gulf War I Vet, Honorable Discharge, Pay Taxes, vote, etc.

    So, uh, while I suspect you’re not super-fucking-citizen, you sure have some balls saying these things. Give the audience here a little bit more background on your idyllic view of the world, won’t you?

    Or just, eh, SHUT THE FUCK UP.

16. Josh sounds like the kind of guy who would enjoy getting pounded up the ass in prison or beaten to death by a cop. How curious…

17. It did it again… it only posted a part of what I wrote! Arrrrggggggg

18. “you have a Freedom of Speech. Now shut up”

19. Josh: You seem rather angry. It must be obvious that your rant is a rather broad brush stroke. Nobody at IfP fits your profile in the least. I can’t believe you’ve missed the massive amount of impeachable offenses Bush has committed. Here are a few:
    http://impeachforpeace.org/evidence/

    Yes, we’re the world’s laughing stock. But not because of the protesters, that’s what the world uses to forgive us for Bush’s behavior. Make no mistake, it’s his behavior around the world that they hate and revile us for.

    War Powers Act? That became null and void the moment Bush started using signing statements to ignore laws. Even the power of the purse is useless. He’s the ‘decider’ of the Unitary Executive. The only cure is impeachment.

    And instead of restricting Freedom of Speech, if you are getting a headache, may I recommend not reading our blog as an alternative. It would save us from a headache as well.

20. Josh McGuirk is a tool. I can’t stress this enough. A total tool.

21. Okay, so these kids read two articles on CNN.com and all of a sudden they know more about the law than police officers? “He has to give his badge number; it’s the law.” Oh, wow, how erudite and savvy of you to bring up a portion of the law you heard about through a friend of a friend. Can you cite the code verbatim? Do you know the circumstances under which that part of the law is null and void? Are you sure that law isn’t something you heard on CSI between bites of low-carb sherbet? Of course you aren’t sure, because you have NO FUCKING IDEA WHAT YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT.

    I love the irony in these videos. These ball-less punks are getting in the cops’ faces and screaming that their protest is nonviolent and without malice. The cops just stand there, impassive. I’m sorry, but if ANYONE got in my face and started screaming like that, I’d send my fist off with a one-way ticket to that person’s crotch. If anyone’s not threatened by a stranger screaming in their face, I’d like to meet them. I’d take advantage of the opportunity to scream in their face to shed the frustration I feel everytime I meet someone pursuing a cause they didn’t even understand themselves. The only tragedy is that the cops did nothing, or if they did the camera didn’t get it. I would have loved to see them stomp the protestors’ candy-ass heads in.

    Not that I have any problem with someone expressing their ideas, but I DO have a huge problem when people think they’re entitled to an audience even though they’re too fucking stupid to put together an opinion of their own. Unfortunately, the Freedom of Speech covers people too dumb to think for themselves, so we have to listen to the same irrational horseshit over and over again — sometimes in large groups like this one. Yes, you have a Freedom of Speech. Now shut up, because what you’re saying is ridiculous and you’re infringing on my freedom to not have a fucking headache.

    These people are calling for the impeachment of President Bush and the removal of troops from Iraq even though 1) Bush has not committed any impeachable offense and 2) the Democrat-controlled Congress has just as much pull when it comes to the deployment of troops in the Middle East. Have you heard of the War Powers Act of 1973? Of course you haven’t, because you get your news and opinions from other jackasses who have no idea what’s going on. It’s so fashionable to rip on President Bush that you only have to do that before saying something and what you say instantly becomes intelligent.

    Well, just for your edification, the War Powers Act of 1973 states that the President may only deploy the U.S. Armed Forces for a period of 60 days. After that, Congress has every right to bring them back. The initial invasion of Iraq was in late March of 2003. Math is a weak point of mine, but I’m pretty sure the time between March 2003 and March of 2007 is slightly more than two months. Even if the War Powers Act of 1973 didn’t exist, Congress could make one. That’s what they do; that’s ALL they do. Don’t give me shit about President Bush being able to veto — if what he was doing wasn’t supported by the people in the Capitol building, it wouldn’t be happening! Don’t like it? Tough tittie. If you’re so opposed to what your government is doing, there’s a solution: Get the fuck out of my country.

    Just in case you didn’t know, having a low approval rating isn’t an impeachable offense. Anything the President has done that you consider “immoral” or “shady” probably isn’t covered by the U.S. Constitution and its derivative laws. If they were, he would have been “called out” by someone in a high place a long time ago. I’m sure you’re familiar with the Constitution. It’s that document that you mindlessly praise but haven’t read. A piece of news for you: morality does not equal legality. Ignoring the fact that there’s no universal set of morals to judge everything by might be hard for you, but you’re the same people who fight for gay marriage and the abolishment of abortion even though a lot of government heavyweights aren’t comfortable with either because those concepts contradict their own idea of morals. The difference is, they have the authority to amend and alter the laws we follow and you don’t. Frustrated? You should be. You’re free to express your thoughts, but your thoughts aren’t worth jack. Taking that 100-level political science doesn’t give you the same amount of pull as the Senator from your state. I’m sure (s)he has become familiar enough with your address to just throw everything (s)he gets from you in the trash because (s)he HAS A JOB TO DO AND DOESN’T HAVE TIME TO WASTE ON IDIOTS LIKE YOU. Your ideas are stupid and you are not important and you wasted hundreds of your state’s revenue on the manpower sent to make sure you retards didn’t accidentally mob someone to death in your misguided attempt to stop the war in Iraq which you know nothing about.

    You’re the same people who complain about the billions spent in Iraq, but still have the gall to drink $5 Starbucks lattes and shop at Whole Foods because you’re so health- and earth-conscious. I dare any of the people in that crowd or any of their sympathizers to tell me what’s going on in countries like Lebanon or Liberia or Nicaragua. Fuck, I’d be satisfied if any of these people could point one of these countries out on a map. But, they can’t. It’s not hip right now to know about Lebanon.

    “Lebanon? That is SO 1980’s. It’s all about Iraq, man, get with the program. You ain’t cool unless you’re bitching about Iraq. And isn’t Liberia a kind of car?”

    I can do nothing but curl my lip and hope that the war ends simply because I’m tired of hearing their half-assed attempts at open-mindedness and rational thought. They act like they’re the only people who are disheartened by the war. Like they’re the only people who are affected by what’s going on. I’ve had friends die over there, I’ve volunteered to go there myself, I know people who are irrevocably damaged by what they saw over there, but WHAT’S MORE IMPORTANT IS THAT YOU DON’T LIKE THE IDEA OF WAR AND THEREFORE THE WAR MUST STOP THIS INSTANT.

    FUCK YOU! FUCK ALL OF YOU.

    I commend those police officers. They’re bigger men that I would have been in that situation. I’m pretty sure they would have gotten away with Mace’ing and batoning those people into subservience. The First Amendment doesn’t cover threats, and I’m pretty sure pointing and crowding at police like that is threat enough. They have families at home. They have responsibilities to themselves and each other and their state. That’s something you protestors wouldn’t know anything about, because your sole responsibility is your conscience which you got from reading PETA literature and eating fucking granola. Shame on the police? Say that next time you’re about to get carjacked and there’s no one around to help you. Say that next time a child molestor walks away scot-free because there wasn’t a policeman there to lay down the law and knock his fucking teeth out on the way to the courthouse.

    Fuck you, you overprivileged jackholes. Mommy and Daddy set you up with a trust fund so you could disturb the peace and pull faithful public servants out of bed at some ungodly hour. Congratulations on being so independent and thoughtful, despite the fact that you barely know how to fold your own laundry. By the way, what was it that you accomplished with your protest in Tacoma, Washington? Do you think they heard you in Tikrit? Do you think the soldiers, airmen, sailors, and Marines are pleased to see that you think what they’re doing is an atrocity? Here’s another vital bit of info for you: THEY DON’T HAVE A CHOICE. It is has been said that “the soldier, above all others, prays for peace.” You probably haven’t heard that, because Noam Chomsky probably hasn’t put it in his books. The fact is, you have no idea what you’re even complaining about. Am I generalizing? Yeah. Am I probably right? Fuck yeah.

    I look at garbage like this and find myself shaking my head and praying for a massive hole to open in the sky and rain fire on us all. Take me first, goddammit. Or at least make me blind and deaf so the enormity of these stupid masses no longer affects me. People in the United States think they have no freedom. These same people have no idea about the difference between Russia and the Soviet Union, let alone what it was like living there 60 years ago.

    Complain all you want. Protest all you want. There’s no law against being stupid, so you’re free. Celebrate that freedom by turning our nation into the world’s laughing-stock.

    And, again, fuck you. I can’t stress this enough. Fuck you.

Comments are closed.