Slashdot Mirror
Anonymous Clashes With D.C. Police During Million Mask March
Daniel_Stuckey writes "Scheduled to coincide with Guy Fawkes Night, a centuries-old day of remembrance typically celebrated in Great Britain, the Nov. 5 protest is something of a tradition for the hacktivist collective. Anonymous, which is often identified by the Fawkes mask used in the Hollywood blockbuster V for Vendetta, hosted a similar rally in 2011, dubbed 'Night of a Thousand Masks.' Protesters in Washington, D.C. clashed with police before noon. By approximately 10am, an arrest was made. The incident was livestreamed, and Anonymous claimed that the individual was grabbed and arrested after stepping off a sidewalk and into the street. A spokesperson for the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department declined to comment."
I've never understood why protesters obey the rules and regulations of protests. I understand protesting, but for god's sake people, staying behind the line, or really keeping up any fabricated reason not to go to jail, is silly. The whole reason for a protest is to go to jail. It's not just to go to jail, but to have so many people go to jail that there is no feasible way that they can house them all. In the end, the point should be to overwhelm not only the people that you are protesting against, but to also overwhelm the police that have to look each person in the eye and arrest them. All protests should carry on without violence, without resistance, until the jails are filled.
"Fight the power" means just that, however there are 2 pieces of the power - law-makers, and law-enforcers.
Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
The establishment really ought to love "Anonymous". Unlike every successful movement, it has no direction and no organisation, therefore it will make no progress. It's just a bunch of kids saying, "We're not very happy about stuff and we think someone should do something about it!"
Maybe it's time to stop supporting three political parties all of which are further to the right than Thatcher.
But I guess everyone has to start somewhere, and that somewhere sometimes involves wearing a mask and burning stuff.
Anonymous is a bunch of mindless vigilante manchildren and idiotic trolls. Maybe if mommy has to go bail them out they'll grow up.
Why hello there, tool of the police state!
After the government is done jailing all the people exercising their 1A rights whom you didn't support because they said things you disapprove of, they'll get around to you.
Some things about, and actions taken by, Anonymous I support. Others I disagree with.
But I'd fight to the death for their right to speak out, because I understand that if they can be silenced, so can I or anyone else.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
If you don't know about agents provocateurs, you really ought not to be at a protest - it's like crossing the road without knowing that you might have to check for traffic.
IOW, protest leaders need to give some basic training to protesters.
It was a celebration of the capture and execution of anti-government forces, with some vaguely anti-Catholic undertones, not a remembrance of their efforts. It has since metamorphosed into a politically neutral excuse to set off some fireworks and eat hamburgers on soggy November nights, and I'm all for using it as an ironic de-facto civil liberties day, but let's not be mistaken about its historical origins.
No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
...Time Warner Inc.'s Guy Fawkes masks.
Also Guy Fawkes failed to blow up the Parliament in real life, so this mask is a mask of fail.
``No,'' said Ford, who by this time was a little more rational and coherent than he had been, having finally had the coffee forced down him, ``nothing so simple. Nothing anything like so straightforward. On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards role the people.''
``Odd,'' said Arthur, ``I thought you said it was a democracy.''
``I did,'' said Ford. ``It is.''
``So,'' said Arthur, hoping he wasn't sounding ridiculously obtuse, ``why don't people get rid of the lizards?''
``It honestly doesn't occur to them,'' said Ford. ``They've all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted in more or less approximates to the government they want.''
``You mean they actually vote for the lizards?''
``Oh yes,'' said Ford with a shrug, ``of course.''
``But,'' said Arthur, going for the big one again, ``why?''
``Because if they didn't vote for a lizard,'' said Ford, ``the wrong lizard might get in. Got any gin?''
In the spirit of things, I choose to set fire to your strawman.
How often do undercover agents actually provoke action from protesters? Over here (NL), it is usually the Autonomen, a group of hard core "professional" protesters, who join otherwise peaceful protests with the specific intent to stir up trouble. These groups have also been used by mayors as a convenient excuse to ban certain protests (usually far right wing marches); they issue the permit for the march, wait for radical leftists to announce a counter-demo (sometimes even helpfully calling them to let them know something's up), and then cancel the permit on grounds of public safety concerns. It's highly likely that these radical groups have been infultrated with government agents, and while I do not think it's these agents who get legitimate protests cancelled, it would not surprise me either if it turns out they are.
Just wondering: what exactly are the legalities of the use of agents provocateur? At the very least the agents themselves could be charged with inciting riots, but someone is giving them orders, and that someone is following someone else's policy or "polite request", it seems to me that some very serious charges could be levelled at the people up the command chain. That is, if anything ever came of inquiries into such matters.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
I see you're preaching for the Church of American Conservatism, and I am not interested in your leaflets.
I don't want to change the size of government. I want the people to take back control of government.
You're just trying to sell me a power vacuum.
I read an article several years ago on how the Park Service handles protests...
DC of course hosts a very large number of government protests. Since most of those protests take place on land managed by the US Park Service, they handle protest management. They are required to reasonably let protestors do their thing, but they also have an interest in preserving the other uses of the land; namely for tourism, recreation, and of course the business of government and the functioning of the city.
Now, if they come down like a sack of bricks on protestors, the Park Service will end up looking like a bunch of thugs, and get slapped by the courts. But if anyone that wants to protest can do anything they want, it would make it difficult for DC to function as a city. Different groups also need different space allocated for their protests. (Six different groups protesting six different things can't get their message out if they are all mixed together in an undifferentiated mob.)
Now, protestors like to be arrested; it makes for good PR, nice photos, fundraising, member recruitment, whatever... but few activists actually want to do anything violent or damaging or spend any time in prison, get beat by riot police, etc. And the Park Service has more important things to do then sending people "up the river" for doing something illegal (but not especially violent) during a protest, like vandalism, blocking traffic, etc., and they also don't want those disruptive offenses to take place. (And they especially don't want a protest to degenerate into a violent mob while trying to get arrested.)
So what does the Park Service do? A couple things:
- They actually negotiate arrest counts, protest locations, timing, etc. in advance of the demonstrations. If you want to protest in a high-profile location, like in front of the White House, your protest can't last too long, and the arrest count the Park Service will agree to will be low. Protests in less photogenic locations can be larger.
- The "arrests" are usually for violation of the "Kodak Moment Rule"; basically, you can't stop in one place so long you obstruct others trying to take photos. This is about the least disruptive thing possible, anywhere, to get arrested for. You'll get zip-tied, taken to a holding facility (a warehouse in SE), fill out some paperwork, pay a $50 fine, and get released (it's even convenient to Metro!) I doubt they do anything with your new "criminal record" other than stuff it in a filing box.
The article had an anecdote about a NORML-backed protest and their negotiations; NORML wanted a large number of protestors on a certain day right in front of the White House. The Park Service negotiator complained that there were already three other protests scheduled that day, and his participant count and requested number of arrests was too large; so the Service offered a larger protest in front of Treasury, (just across the street) instead. The guy from NORML challenged the Park Service lawyer to a joint rolling contest to settle the dispute.
The Park Service lawyer won.
Another fun fact: After the Park Service got accused over the years of being racist/anti-semitic/muslim/sexist/baby-killing/woman-hating/jewish/white-oppressing/Nazi/etc. Tools of the Oppressor, they stopped releasing protest/march participant estimates. They do estimate how many people show up for each protest, but don't release the info because they were invariably accused of inflating/undercounting (depending on who was complaining) every single gathering for pretty much every cause.
For properly organized protests, the Park Service will agree (in advance) to arrest you and your fellow patriots in a way that won't harm your reputation in the least. As long as you don't degenerate into a violent mob, they'll happily (and photogenically) arrest you for obstructing the sidewalk, haul you off zip-tied in a van to a holding facility, issue you a nominal fine for a misdemeanor about as serious as a minor speeding ticket, and release you. (I doubt they even care if you pay the fine or not.)
"Obstructing a Sidewalk" is hardly a violation upon which lives are ruined.