Shut up Spidey. The only thing weaker than your connection with reality is your reading comprehension. Your straw man is so ridiculous it doesn't even warrant mockery.
http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/ar...ith-pepper-spray-by-spd-reportedly-miscarries
Pregnant woman peppersprayed at #occupy seattle miscarries baby.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3F1ItGFF9sQ&feature=channel_video_title
This is her shortly before finding out that she's not going to be a mother anymore. Scott Peterson anyone?
IMO, if they can successfully connect the protest incidents with the miscarriages, perhaps these women should be charged with criminally negligent homicide or negligent endangerment of a child...http://itsallgone.tumblr.com/post/13154020857/i-lost-a-child-to-the-occupy-movement
Here's a blog post from today of another woman claiming she lost her baby 8 months in.
Oh there is plenty going on from both sides. Including you actually.
I feel bad for anyone who lost their child peacefully protesting though. The police department better lawyer up.
Answer these questions concerning the use of pepper spray in Seattle:
Did the Police not provide ample warnings that pepper spray was going to be used?
Did the Police not give the protestors ample time to disperse and get out of the street they were blocking prior to deploying pepper spray?
I think the protestors thought the Police were bluffing and they lost when the Police deployed the pepper spray. I also believe the same is true at UC Davis due to the fact there's no video recordings that were taken for minutes prior to the use of pepper spray.
If i were the police officers involved and their union reps i'd be filing a lawsuit just as fast as I could, if any of the story can be disproved i'd look into prosecution.
Yes it is, but as soon as someone breaks the law they cease to be non-violent.
In the case of numerous protesters breaking the law then repeatedly breaking the law again to ignore lawful commands by the police, then yes, they stop being non-violent. You and others may argue that jay-walking or spitting on a sidewalk isn't violent, but you're avoiding the reality of the situation.
I believe you're absolutely wrong and that corporations / investors will continue to do what they've always done -- they'll completely ignore you.
You expect businesses to self-regulate before the Government does so itself? LOL! Good luck with that...
/rolleyes
Wrong.
You made too broad an assertion there. You now grouped in finance with rape.
Violent = hitting/hurting someone or some thing. You are making stuff up when you link obstructionism (passive) with violent crime.
Hey guys, it's ok to assault sitting, nonthreatening, nonviolent protesters with chemical agents so long as you tell them you're going to do it first.
In the case of numerous protesters breaking the law then repeatedly breaking the law again to ignore lawful commands by the police, then yes, they stop being non-violent. You and others may argue that jay-walking or spitting on a sidewalk isn't violent, but you're avoiding the reality of the situation.
Maybe they should use bulldozers to clear the road instead.
In the case of numerous protesters breaking the law then repeatedly breaking the law again to ignore lawful commands by the police, then yes, they stop being non-violent.
You and others may argue that jay-walking or [removed spit. Nobody said this] isn't violent, but you're avoiding the reality of the situation.
Maybe they should use bulldozers to clear the road instead.
Nice irrelevant dodge to the topic in discussion.
lol. prosecution for what?
IMO, if they can successfully connect the protest incidents with the miscarriages, perhaps these women should be charged with criminally negligent homicide or negligent endangerment of a child...
Actually, that was a direct reply to your statement.
If you are saying he is dodging, buy logical association, you are saying YOU were dodging.
I really do not think you intended to say that about yourself. You better apologize or you might get upset at yourself!!!
I was on topic.
If no police report was ever filled out, then there may be no grounds for criminal prosecution, but as a union rep i'd certainly look into slander and libel.
I never said you weren't.
I said your assertion and your broad connotation and classification of crime was incorrect.
Again you are trying to play hardball with someone who is rather a stickler when it comes to grammar.
You could be on fire and that would still not make your statement any more correct, nor would I contest your claim to flame.
Except for police using unnecessary force to break up a peaceful protest
Exactly. This isn't a riot.
I disagree ninja, it is a crime, and it ends their claim of non-violence. You and others may think it's OK, knock yourselves out.