Why all this anarchy at any global political event?, eg: Davos, Gothenburg etc...

Let me quickly explain why there is so much anarchy bull at these world gatherings. Spoiled middle class kids, (a bit like the '60s hippies) that don't understand world politics want to act like they care about something. They perceeve large governments, (the US especially) as the big bully of the world. Most of them are paranoied idiots that don't understand if the world worked better together, there would be a lot less problems. People are too uptight and worried.

Melow out my fellow homosapiens!

Hey curly1,

Did you bother to consider the possibility that there are people living in Cambridge who may not be attending the University?

And, that a large majority of those protesting are fed up with Corporate abuse and are not anarchists? By the way, those playing for the TV cameras and destroying property were one thing: vandals ... not Anarchists!

I was commenting you on what I thought was the university you were attending. I didn't mean to come off scarcastic. But anyways, I understand about the corporate abuse. Some of it I believe.

Biggles said, "why is there all this anarchy at any global political event?" He wasn't talking about anarchists, he was talking about the disorder and general adjatation that occurs at these events. I was commenting on those idiots that like to screw up WTO meetings and such.

I personally believe that these organizations are a lot more timid than the paranoied believe. All i'm saying is that those people and us should melow out a little bit, become less woried about things that aren't hurting us and just relax. I think the world is getting to uptight and worried about stupid things. If we all melowed out then we'd be a lot better off. Trust me.

Thanks for replying to my message Chagur.

Originally posted by thecurly1
They perceeve large governments, (the US especially) as the big bully of the world

if you had to answer the question; what country is the "big-bully" of other countries in the world? what would you say?

they are..
who else tests bombs on middle eastern countries?
who else build massive nuclear arsenals in peace time?
whos bitches are the NATO and the UN?

you're from the US.. please dont tell me you think your country isnt the most corrupt, figure head of bad government that exists in the world.

you'll be the first smart patriotic person ive ever met if you can prove otherwise.

the only ppl who like the US are its residents (and then its only because they're stupid plebs).. ill make a wager that if you asked 10 people from random non-US locations if they liked the american government, that almost all of them would say no.

sorry to sound cynical and nasty.. but the US isnt exactly the greatest country in the world.

and whats with the proselytisation of democracy!!!*(&(*$&(!&$
can i get a person from the US to answer that?

I am the smartest patriot- corrections to your analisys of the United States of America.

1) we test bombs in bombing ranges of our middle eastern allies, we're not droping them at random on civilans.

2)If you knew anything about the US military is that we have cut defense spending constantly since the end of the Cold War. Last month President Bush said he was astonished by the number of nuclear weapons in are arsenal and would speed up the scaling back of these weapons, faster than it is allready being done.

3)The United Nations has voted us out of the Human Rights Council, and disagreed on actions before. The UN isn't our bitch. If anything I praised the UN in a thread a few days ago, look it up.
NATO was founded by the US to protect our allies from attack by other countries. The Feb. bombing of Iraqi AA sites wasn't a NATO mission, but that of the US and UK.

4)Does the US government have corruption? Yes. Is the US a perfect system of governemnt? No. But there is less corruption in the United States than there is in the Russian Federation, and many of the former Soviet states. We aren't the perfect system of government, and that isn't the point. The day any government is viewed by the people to be perfect (I never said it was at any point) is the day we should all be very frightened, because that means the public has completely capitualted to its government.

5)You wanna know what a bad government is? A governemnt that has a one-couple one-child birth policy. Like the PRC. The Peoples Republic of China will only allow one couple one child because of overcrowding. If a second child is born, without permission from the state the child is killed like this. When the baby's head first pokes out of the mother's womb, a doctor takes a syringe of formaldihide, sticks it into the baby's soft spot of the head and injects the solution into the brain. If that isn't the ultimate act of cruiltiy I don't know what is.

6)We don't sponsor terrorist to run around in rental cars, and blow up embassies, or tear holes in the sides of ships. We have never used chemical, or biological weapons on our on civilians, a la Sadam Hussein.

7)For the mistakes of putting German, Japanesses, and Italians in interment camps during WWII, the US government shelled out over a BILLION dollars in reperations to those who we punished.

I find it quite interesting how other foreign countries will take shots at us when we do something just slightly distastefull. But when there is a crisis, when another country needs help with a plague, or needs money to keep vital health care programs going, we the United States of America, and its tax payers have payed well over a trillion dollars in foreign aid since the end of the Second World War. Even when we were five trillion dollars in debt, we still shelled out cash to coutnries that have needed it.
The US has lead the way in vaccinating the world from Smallpox, and is nearly completing to erradicate Polio from the world.
The ultimate act of unshelfishness was, even before Pearl Harbor, Roosevelt put American ships in the Atlantic to commit unrestricted, covert warefare on German U-boats to help our friend Britian.
If you can name anyother country, and give examples of such little selfishness I will shut up.
P.S. I assume that you think your country is better than us, I'd like to know where you are from barf.

THIS SINGLE DOCUMENT INSPIRED Ghandi, the Eastern Bloc freedom fighters, even Mao Zedung and Ho Chi Minh. PRETTY AMAZING HOW ONE PEICE OF PAPER WRITTEN 225 YEARS AGO CAN BE THAT RESONATING.


THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE


Action of the Second Continental Congress, July 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen United State of America

WHEN in the Course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth, the seperate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which imples them to the Seperation.
WE hold these truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness-That to secure these Rights, Governemtns are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governedd, that whenever any Form of Governmetn becomes destructive of these Ends, it si the right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likelye t effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governemnts long established should not be changed for light and transient Causes; and accordingly all Experinece hath shewn, that Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long Train of Abues and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, envinces a Design to reduce them under absolute future Security. Such has been the pateinet Sufferance of these Colonies; and now the Necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The History of the present King of Great-Britian is a History of repeated Injuries and Usurpations, all having in direct Object the Establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid World.

CONSTITUION OF THE UNITED STATES
WE the people of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the commond defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution fo rhte United States of America.

HEY, IF ANY OF THIS LOOKS FAMILAR, ITS BECAUSE MOST DEMOCRATIC COUNTRIES CONSTITUIONS ARE BASED ON THE USA's!

AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free excerise theorof; or abridinging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Amenment II
A well regulated Militaia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed.
Amendment III
No Solider shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, with outht eh consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizuress, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searches, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamouse crim, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall nay person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeporady of life or limb, nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;' nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and sistric wherein the crime shall have been commited; which district shall have been perviously aseertianed by law, and to be informed of the nature and causes of the accustaion; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defence.
Amendment VII
In Suits at common law, where the value in controvery shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be perserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States than according to the rules of the common law.
Amendment VIII
Ecessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor crule and unusual punishments inflicted
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constituion of certain rights shall not be constructed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States are reserved to the States respecitively, or to the people.

THANKS FOR RESPONDING TO MY THREAD

thecurly1,

Why don't you and Jagdwuf team up and start your own thread?

Like '101 Reasons Why Amerika is WONDERFUL!'

I live within the geographic boundary that the United States government claims as its own, and I do not like the government or give it my consent.

Not all so called U.S. citizens are mindless supporters of democracy.

So ,Corp.Hudson, what would you support? What's your alternative, please elaborate...:eek:

First Corp.Hudson, I am far from a mindless supporter of American democracy. As a matter of fact I may even be slightly more critical, on valid issues as you are. I don't support President Bush's decree of drilling for Alaskan oil which I view as unnecessary. I also had extreme doubts about the 2000 Election, I think more happened than we were told, and I don't think the Supreme Court should have stopped the recount. As a matter of fact the whole state should have been recounted.

Biggles, that was a great reply to Corp.Hudson's doubts on democracy. Would you prefer to live under a communist police state, or a fascist state where you have absolutely no say in your government and what they do to you? I would find it interesting for anyone, especially American to prefer a totalitarian state, and give up their rights. Luckily we DON'T live in a totalitarian state, but one of democracy, which so far has proven a lot better system of governing than the alternative.

Thanks again both of you for replying.

If my math is correct, you weren't born until '86 (accepting your statement that you are fifteen years old), three years before the Berlin Wall came down ('89).

Considering how things have gone for the people of Russia and in most of the other republics that formed the U.S.S.R. (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics), and the recent election of Putin in Russia, I'd say that there are quite a few people in that part of the world who would be more than happy to return to the 'bad old days'.

Far closer to our shores, the Cuban people have for the past forty two years supported Castro and a government we have tried to destroy since its inception. Doesn't that strike you as a little odd? Particularly in light of the fact that Cuba has one of the highest literacy rates in the Western Hemisphere?

Neither the Russian or the Cuban people are illiterate peasants thanks to the Socialist systems of government they lived under for a good number of years, yet neither are falling over themselves to embrace democratic capitalism. Ever wonder why?

Yes I am fifteen, so that does make me only three years old when the Berlin Wall fell. But I do know a lot about the Cold War. Socialism works great on paper, that's why it was highly enticing during the Great Depression, when it seemed like many of the democratic nations where crumbling. If my memory serves me correct the socialist party was elected in Britain during the twenties or thirties, don't quote me. Anyway, I'm not saying that socialism or communism can't do anything, it did make Russian citizens more educated than they where under the Czars but at what price? I thoroughly believe that freedom is something that should never be traded for any other prize for the public. Luckily for the Russians they barely got their freedom back.
Putin took over as President after Yeltsin left at the start of 2000. He didn't get in there on the account of elections, though he was voted in later. I truly feel sorry for the Russians, who seem to be hard working, good hearted people who don't deserve the poverty that is taking place right now. There will be those who want the old guard returned, but they are generally older citizens, the youth hold the key to success in Russia. We must also remember that the Russian Federation is celebrating its 10th anniversary this year, and that democracy and a free market economy in Russia will not be an overnight success story. It took years for Taiwan and Japan to become great countries after their economies and societies had undergone great changes. I think that Russia is on the upswing and not the other way.

I hope.

I agree, thecurly1.

Now, if we'd only get off Cuba's back.

Enjoying having you around.

hey all
im confused! - :confused:
which country is based on socialism?
i have not heard of any
maybe germany is close?
enlighten me please
or is someone confusing socialism with communisim?

groove on all :)

I agree that there sould be some easings of the policies that the US has toward Cuba. But you gotta admit, Fidel has not made it any easier on himself. He has thumbed his nose at most oppurtunites or tried to embarass the US when he could get a free or cheap shot in. That's not the mark of someone you want to be trade partners with.

In his favor, the US has not exactly been the best of neighbors either. But then I wouldn't want him to watch my back but I would rather wacth him real close after the missle crisis. At the time it was about 200 to 300 miles away from home. Just a short missle skip and a jump.

He is now pretty much isolated from such prospects happening again. I know there is a large Hispanic culture in Miami who would love the chance to see family and relatives again. The only way they can now is to go somewhere out of the US and take a flight from there to Cuba. Cuba could do with some cash and trade but the tones would have to change and I don't think either is going to back down. As long as it remains in this state there will be no changes.

The real thing that kept Yugoslavia alive was Tito being their leader for so long. When Castro dies, (he's in his 80's now?) the people with help from the US will probably rise up against Castro and restore democracy in Cuba. Castro has largely wrecked his country, not the US. If he'd been a little bit softer we would have lifted the embargo.

You say that when Castro dies, the people will rise up against him...

So is Castro going to be a member of the living dead, or what?

Sorry it took me so long to respond...

What system would I prefer besides "democracy"?

Before I state my preferred governmental system, I wanted to say that I found your responses interesting. It seems that the people of this board are unaware of any system of governance other then "Democracy" and dictatotorial systems.

I personally think that tribalism is the best governmental system.

It has survived 3 million years, it is highly adaptable (it works for small bands of people or vast nations), and those living under it are invariably better off then those not living under it.

What vast nation has a tribal government?

It seems that even though you say how bad the US government is you haven't left it. Why are you still here?

I would also like to say that the US is not a democracy. It is a republic.

There were many large tribal nations, before the age of exploration.

Probably the best example of a large tribal nation that was prosperous and well organized is the Cherokee Confederacy. Consisting of 13 states, a multicameral legislature, and a constitution, the Cherokee Confederacy was actually the largest influence on the founding fathers...many of them studied with the cherokee, and observed the government in action before even attempting to form the US government.

And why am I still here?

Well, geographically, the US is my home. I have spent all if my life in Colorado, it is what I know.

Also, I don't share the belief that land can be owned. It is a foreign concept to me. So "leaving" the US is a simple process, and I plan on doing it on my 18th birthday.

And the US is a democratic republic, btw.

" There were many large tribal nations, before the age of exploration.
Probably the best example of a large tribal nation that was prosperous and well organized is the Cherokee Confederacy. "

WOW, the Cherokee Confederacy was such a vast nation that it ruled over a whole 50,000 populace and today's estimates are about 370,000. Amazing. I think we should follow that example immediately. 400,000 is close enough to 300,000,000.

" And the US is a democratic republic, btw."

My personal belief is the "democratic" was added by arrogant Americans that wanted to brag about our "new" form of government. In other words, bullshit.

" Also, I don't share the belief that land can be owned. It is a foreign concept to me. So "leaving" the US is a simple process, and I plan on doing it on my 18th birthday.
"

Where are you going to go where land is not owned? Also where are you going to go where tribal government rules? Are you going to live with the Cherokee?

hey all
just a quick note on what could appear to be a glazed subject>
money will buy you anything in any country so therefor
all are capitalist!
labels are mearly that that!
those who follow labels follow service to self!
the capitalist way....survival of the fittest.
!
when will i not be imprisoned for killing a rich weak person so i may take all their money? :D

and the world, so turns.
on vicious burns.
when will we learn,
to just take turns?

:(

groove on all :)

Just keep an eye out for any action in Genoa, which is hosting the G8 summit of world leaders on Friday. Anti-globalisation protesters have already begun to mass at the Italian port.

I like the way Bush has just criticized anyone wishing to protest as "no friends to the poor".. "Those who protest against free trade seek to deny them from their best chance for escaping poverty."

What are the benefits of free trade?... will the rich get richer?( as perhaps the anarchists believe). Aren't governments using these 'trade tools' as bargaining power for increased rights for people who live in countries that abuse human rights, such as China.

I'm not stupid, I know there is a certain amount of self interest in these meetings....so, as my original question (at the beginning of this thread) intimates.... what are these anarchists protesting about? ... antiglobalisation? what's wrong with that? Capitalism? As ripleofdeath has mentioned, were all guilty of that... trade and capitalism have existed ever since civilization began!:rolleyes:

Bush has got a point. The poor do benefit - though not the poor in this country - but pay for it dearly (ex. the ecological mess the Mexican border towns have become).

Yes, the rich will get richer. And as for it being a tool; why aren't corporations, with a little nudge from our government, investing in places like Afghanistan, or even Peru or Ecuador, where there are known 'human rights' problems, not concocted ones?

Maybe what they're protesting about is the hypocrisy of it all.

Actually, the Cherokee nation was 200,000 strong, before it was decimated by plagues brought by european invaders.

And the Cherokee had a far superior form of government, that the US Constitution is largely based on. (don't belive me? Go read about the structure of the cherokee nations political system, compare it to what is in the constitution, and then look to see how much time the founding fathers spent studying with te Cherokee).

And where will I go where land is not owned? Spoken like a true American.

I will stay where I an right now, physically. America is a mental state, not a physcal one.

hey all
yo biggles

monopolies are not capitalist in the nature of trade so there for
capitalism is doomed :D
globalisation is another form of monopoly! lots of people have only bad examples of this because of all the perverted people who have run them!

we need a new model of social accountability to conform to by all corperations.
try and find someone who trusts a big corperation!
scratch that!-try and find someone who trusts :/

globalisation is the key to advance our world !-however the people who might run it are not the people who will serve the world!
service to self is the problem of most of those leaders!
oh and gutlesnes they are afraid to try to change things for the better incase it doesnt work like all the countrys economies are doing rite now (:/)
figure that!.......?

anywho
groove on all :)

" Actually, the Cherokee nation was 200,000 strong, before it was decimated by plagues brought by european invaders.
And the Cherokee had a far superior form of government, that the US Constitution is largely based on. (don't belive me? Go read about the structure of the cherokee nations political system, compare it to what is in the constitution, and then look to see how much time the founding fathers spent studying with te Cherokee)."

It does not matter since the government has never actually controlled more than 1/100 of our current population, or less than 1%. Because the framers studied with them does not make their government superior. In fact it supports that ours is superior. It would lead to the conclusion that the framers took what was there and improved on it. I really do not care who they studied with. If you can show that the tribal system would be able to handle a population of 300million people better than a republic then I might look at it as a viable alternative.

You also said earlier that you were leaving on you 18th birthday. Now you say you are not?

If you stay in this country, no matter what the mindset, you are a hypocrite. While you dip your hand into all of Americas luxuries you will close your eyes and say everybody else is promoting this horrible form of government. If you truly want to know how effective this system is move to China, India, or visit one of those wonderful 3rd world countries. And don't go visit a tourist magnet either. Go live with the average commoner there. Have fun :)


:rolleyes:

Corp.Hudson,

Per you:

And the Cherokee had a far superior form of government, that the US Constitution is largely based on.

Per the Tolatsga Organization - History of the Cherokee:

By 1817 the clan system of government had been replaced by an elected tribal council. A new capital was established at New Echota in 1825, and a written constitution modeled after that of the United States was added two years later.

What goes?

Spoken like a true american, once again. This conversation is not worth continuing.

Once you take the blinders off, then I will discuss this further.


Chagur- The US took the Cherokee's political system, and basically westernized it. Made it non-tribal, and tried to make it emulate the european system of doing things.

Then, when the US got tired of having the Cherokee around, they destroyed their nation, and forced the Cherokee to adopt a western system of government.

I am not explaining it very well, its hard to get out. Let me think of a better way to express myself...

hhhhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmm
the fact of history as i interpret it is that all western societies
are ego driven and thus fear and outcast all superior knoledge in a form of "other" culture.
this makes it no different from hitlers book burning party politics.

and maybe an equivilant in eastern terms might be that they
killed all the people (a form of knoledge base) and then read the books and tried to reverse engineer their social systems.
in fear of re-establishment.

i am genralising wildly to illistrate a point!

the real issues are easily boxed into racist issues because of the
nature of the beasts illnes-EGO>FEAR Vs PRIDE>FEAR.

SO CRINGE ALL YE MORTALS for the wroth of the ignorant
superior(hang on?) beings[extra terrestrial] are uppon us as we stumble across our own trail of self perpetuating greef.
striding into the fire of mistrust and FEAR OF fear.
THIS CREATES an ideal enviroment for the only real ANARCHY that will prevail---- global capitalisation>dictating law and social policy.

:D

groove on all

A ring of steel was put up around the historic city of Genoa yesterday as it braced itself for an invasion of anti-globalisation protesters.

Police fear the G8 summit, which starts in the Italian port tomorrow, will trigger rioting similar to that seen at last month's European Union meeting in Gothenburg.

Roads leading to the city's Ducal Palace, where summit meetings will take place, were baracaded behind 13ft iron barriers. Genoa's airport, railway stations and harbour were all closed.

Anti-aircraft missiles were deployed at the airport and naval vessels patrolled the seas. Local jails have been emptied to make room for the rioters.

Up to 20,000 police and soldiers are patrolling the city. Up to 3,000 protesters are already thought to be in Genoa, birthplace of Christopher Columbus. Guards at the Italian/French border have turned away 700 people headed for the summit. A train chartered to carry hundereds of British protesters from Calais to Genoa was cancelled by the French national railway company, SNCF.

My thought is, since when were these protesters organised enough to warrant anti-aircraft missiles, or Naval destroyers?:D

THIS CREATES an ideal enviroment for the only real ANARCHY that will prevail---- global capitalisation>dictating law and social policy.
Right on, rip. Decent, and unique, way of looking at it.

Hang in there!

http://news.bbc.co.uk./olmedia/1445000/images/_1449342_genoa_protesters5_map300.gif



WHY?????

Let's face it, people have the democratic right to protest (peacefully!) but now somone has lost their life.

The anti-capitalists are quick to call him a martyr to the cause... but what is the cause? The G8 meetings' agenda was about dicussing "world health, poverty and debt relief"

So let's suppose these actions are taken by a minority with the aim of causing maximum damage... a kind of weekend punch-up.. they've been banned from Soccer games in Europe.. so they need some-where else to let off steam!! As mentioned before by other writers in this thread... maybe their anger is not specifically directed at what is being discussed at these meetings, but simply the governments now representing the majority of the world...


What-ever their motives... the Canadian G8 summit will now propbably take place in a remote bunker in some mountain. What has the young Italian died for??:confused:

Originally posted by Biggles
Why all this anarchy at any global political event?, eg: Davos, Gothenburg etc...

I came late to this thread. Posters are jumping all over except the topic. I have a headache just reading this.

Does anybody have any clue where these demonstrators get money to go there and protest? Why these demonstrators have so much free time? Our western society is structured such a way that you can not have a lot of free time. You have to work to feed your habit, baby, car, or shelter. Are they all living in their parents house? Why? Who organizes and funds these protestors? How these people think the same thought? 3 people gather in this forum with 6 different thoughts!

What-ever their motives... the Canadian G8 summit will now propbably take place in a remote bunker in some mountain. What has the young Italian died for?? 1. More likely than not on a private island;

2. Because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time - reason enough.

Committed or just for the hell of it! Tens of thousands have been doing it for decades - remember Woodstock?

How these people think the same thought? 3 people gather in this forum with 6 different thoughts! 1. They don't! Apparently you've never been to one;

2. Hell, and here I thought I was the only two-headed person on this forum (though come to think of it, there is HOWARDSTERN).

the protester attacked a police vehicle with a fire extinguisher
if he was shot before he threw it then good job!
if he was shot after it was thrown then it should be an offence!
what would have happend if the fire extinguisher had of exploded in the police vehicle?
they are declaring war on the police!
they should not be surprised to have bullets coming in their direction, rite or wrong!
what sensable person takes a fire Extinguisher to a gun fight?

if i was going to attack armed people i would not do so with a stone or fire extinguisher!
the guy was looking for trouble and he found it.
now the only thing we can hope for is that the officer who shot him is held to account and tried in a court.

good point about where do they get there money from!...?
and are the police checking the crowds for soccer hooligans?
AND! they have video cameras so if they wanted they could arrest the people who were throwing stones instead of beating anyone they could grab.
BUT JUST STOP AND THINK ABOUT WHAT TYPE OF PERSON JOINS THE POLICE FORCE!
more so in a country that has allot of violent crime.
most will be 50% of the problem!

groove on all :)

Anarchy! Is to trust yourself to run your life. As instead of the goverment.
Since somebody asked...Sweden has a socialistic goverment. And the demonstrations in Gothenburg were quite unique in Swedish history. The police didnīt even have any approprate means to control the demonstration, as they have in other countries. Iīm a bit confused, in which side to stand on.
I donīt support the police and neither do I support those who were throwing rocks at the policehorses and destroying stores and cars.
It could have been a peaceful demonstration instead, but Iīve heard that people from other countries also came to join the riots and added to the hysteria.

For heaven sake, don't stand in the middle!

We have found here in the US that a lot of times when there is going to be a demonstration that outside influences, such as national groups, who have their own axes to grind, get in to the demonstration. Their agendas are not the demonstration organizers agenda. They usually come to push things and instigate what would not normally take place. Such as the rock throwing. This makes it difficult to estimate what is required to control the mob. Which leads to escalation. You should be proud that your police were not equipped to handle such. It means that normally your people are very law abiding. IMO, if it were not for those outside influences most likely nothing untoward would have happened. It would have been just a demonstration. Peaceful.

Welcome to the global economy and all that comes with it.

I have been posting mails on the UK Government site, and had a spirited discussion today about this very subject. My view on these anarchists is simply this: They are leech-humans who suck the lifeblood out of the very host they intend to destroy. Whilst an unreported peaceful protest was taking place in Genoa, all Sky News was interested in was the violence; giving publicity to the very "people" who thrive on it. These anarchists are made up of middle class bored yobs and some "high born" too. Also included in the equation are the "rent a mob" thugs whose sole purpose in life is to disrupt anything remotely "establishment". The Italian police, pre warned, knew how to deal with them and did. Any loss of life is regretable; but the thug who died did so, in the act of an illegal attempt to take a life; by attempting to throw a fire extinguisher (which he stole) into the face of a policeman. The policeman, with bare seconds to react, saved his own life and those of his comrades, by shooting the protester dead. I can live with that. Should that extinguisher have landed, who knows how many lives would have been lost? The vehicle concerned could have gone out of control, smashing into friend or foe alike. But the media (namely Sky News) was only interested in the death - not its cause or consequences. A newsgirl, who even looked like one of the anarchists, interviewed an "escaped" anarchist and reported "their side" as fact when we all know that their "view" was going to be biased. The "headquarters" of these people was raided this morning and items removed as well as arrested protesters - 6 of which were British. The news, same source, complained about "police brutality" instead of reporting facts. To summarise, those who wish to live by the sword, should expect to die by the sword - these protesters were not there to demonstrate against this or that policy; most of them did not know what the G8 was all about. They were there to destroy, plain and simple. We should have no sympathy for them or what happens to them, instead we should look away at the unreported peaceful protestors and ask them why they were there.

Problem #1

Biggles ...
What-ever their motives... the Canadian G8 summit will now propbably take place in a remote bunker in some mountain. To which I replied
More likely than not on a private island You were closer, Biggles. Hear that it's going to be at some remote, swank hotel on the top of a mountain.

Problem #2

Biggles ...
What has the young Italian died for?? To which I replied
Because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time - reason enough. Guess I'm going to have to retract that and instead say "Because he was being a damned idiot!"

I guess what bugs me most is that it's stuff like this that leads the average 'I get all the news I need from TV' to equate Anarchy with vandalism ... which irritates me every bit as much as equating Communism with Stalinism.

"Welcome to the global economy.." :(
If it only were in the interest of the globe, Earth... :rolleyes: