THIS IS SABOTAGE, THEY SHOULD BE JAILED FOR NOT MORE THAN 30 YEARS!

The swill hate America (communist funded) protesters have now went too far.

Yesterday the port of Oakland was blocked by this swill. They targeted the port because a shipping company was handling war supplies.

The police had to fire rubber bullets to clear the entrance to the docks.

This is SABOTAGE during a time of war. This is not PEACEABLY protesting, which is protected. This is a crime and the swill should be arrested, tried and jailed for not more than 30 years.

How can this happen? I'll tell you why, because CALIFORNIA IS A SOCIALIST failed state, the inmates are running the jails.

TELL ME HOW I'M WRONG. The swill did what I said they would, now they should be charged.

 

Out:

You can pick a jail where the guards are in charge.

That should just make your day.

 

[radiofreecostarica]

out,

wrong again....

http://truthout.org/docs_03/040903A.shtml

 

Those two pieces of garbage will think twice about pulling a stunt like that again.

I want to know why they were not charged with sabotage? That's the REAL question. They hindered the movement of military goods during a time of war. They only have a right to PEACEABLY protest, they DO NOT have the right to fuk with people. They got what they deserved.

 

???????????????

 

[Phaedrus]

outandup, couple of serious questions:

1) How can you seriously call protesters "saboteurs" over and over and over? As far as I can see no actual sabotage has taken place -- a number of them blocked the streets around the Pacific Stock Exchange; lucky for them I was not driving down the street at the moment. But seriously -- why the propagandist brouja?

2) You suggest that these people should be "charged" and "tried" which I presume means that you do believe in some recourse to the law. If I may ask, what should be the recourse for the officers who clearly acted in contravention of law, policy and manufacturer's caveat in using the baton cannon on human targets? You say that the protesters deserve it, since they are sabotuers and should be tried as such, but surely you cannot reconcile such a clearly anti-law mentality with the desire to judicially try and convict anti-American communist-funded sabotuers?


I am eagerly seeking clarity form you on these points.


Phaedrus

 

[KennyB]

The demonstrators carried signs including “Shut down the war makers.”

This is not a protected protest and these traitors should be flogged. I would max these people out. Wood Shampoos for all.

I don't see how you anti-war clowns can argue for these fuks. The intent of the protest was to block supplies from being shipped.

 

[radiofreecostarica]

again

http://truthout.org/docs_03/040903A.shtml

learn to read.

ps...and pilgrim, you are the unfit american.

 

[KennyB]

This doesn't sound to peaceable to me:

"Word said protesters threw rocks, wood and metal pins at a line of officers and ignored three warnings given in two-minute intervals to leave. In addition, he said they started a bonfire in the middle of the street."

http://www.oaklandtribune.com/Stories/0,1413,82~1865~1310006,00.html

 

[Phaedrus]

All of which are criminal acts to be prosecuted in a criminal court. I disagree with these protesters' methods if not the basic principal of being an "anti-war fvck." My point is, you and outandup and a number of others are clamoring for these people's prosecution (or perhaps persecution) for breaking the law, but by no means advocate following these same rules in the process. What, then, is the point of the law at all?


Phaedrus

 

[KennyB]

I have no problem whatsoever with people peacably protesting. However, the problem is that the protestors want to use disruptive means. Blocking traffic is no way to get sympathy from the public.

The Cubans in Miami tried doing that during the Elian crisis and all it did was enrage the rest of the population and made them turn against the cause of the protestors.