Friday, November 4, 2011

Occupy Oakland Thugs Revel in Violence

How revolting and how typical that "progressives" would embrace a movement that has no real agenda outside of trashing the streets.

And here are the "peaceful protesters" smashing up a Bank of America.

These people are "peaceful protesters" like the Jihadis aboard the Mavi Marmara were "peaceful protesters."

And this is what the left supports?

Whatever anyone might want to say about the Tea Party people, at least they weren't vicious thugs.


  1. Violence was inevitable; surely everyone knew that. It's always part of leftist activism.

  2. So what is the alternative for peaceful participants? End the protest because of the involvement of violent participants?

    Or continue to be involved and risk being labeled by the behavior of the worst of the participants? Much like the genesis of all bigotry.

  3. I just got here and the town explodes in violence courtesy of the progressive-left.

    Thanks, guys.

  4. Stuart, why are you making excuses?

    The occupy whateverthehellitis is not peaceful.

    Throwing bottles and rocks at cops does not a peaceful protest make.

    I am suddenly put to mind of heathlander claiming that the second intifada was peaceful. Sure, it was peaceful. I mean, if you ignore the violence and mayhem and murder and blood, it was a very peaceful.

    Wouldn't want to prejudice people from the entire peaceful intifada just because it was no such thing.

  5. Stuart,good point. I don't advocate ending the protests; that's every citizens right. What response those self same peaceful protesters come up with will reflect their real agenda though. Hand wringing won't really cut it.

  6. I don't think there's any comparison between the intifada and OWhatever. Violence is not a key component of the Occupy protests. Or certainly from my perspective, it doesn't appear to be. Violence is the exception. You can give me a handful of examples of those exceptions. There are hundreds of examples where there hasn't been any violence.

    The intifada...either chapter...not so much.

    And making excuses? Weird question to ask.

  7. Making excuses.

    You're right, you're not making excuses, but you trying to explain it away as somehow not very meaningful.

    Well, Stuart, I live here in Oakland and I very definitely do not appreciate these thugs fighting it out with cops in the streets of my city.

    Furthermore, I never claimed that there was a comparison between OWhatever and the 2nd intifada beyond the fact that both contained violence and that there are always progressives ready to either justify that violence or otherwise explain it away.

  8. Nope, wasn't trying to do that either. I asked what the alternative is for peaceful participants. If there is a violence emanating from a small minority, should the protest be abandoned?

  9. I think that you were, Stuart.

    I think that precisely what you are trying to do is deflect from this violence in the streets of my city.

    But, OK, let us go directly to your deflective question.

    "If there is a violence emanating from a small minority, should the protest be abandoned?"

    If a protest turns violent than it should be put down as a matter of public safety.

    Do you disagree?

  10. No, I don't.

    I'm pretty agnostic when it comes to the whole OWS thing. I guess generally supportive of the criticism of the financial markets, though I'm not sure of the goals, so it certainly doesn't stir any passion in me. I don't have any kind of metric to measure it's success. So i really was only questioning your criticism on a purely theoretical level.

    I have to admit, other than seeing "Oakland" and "#occupy" in every third diary at dkos, I don't really know whats going on in your streets. But I certainly don't condone violence, so I'm sorry you're having to live through it.

    Now I have to call my son and make sure it's not him breaking windows in your fine city.