Urbana-Champaign Independent Media Center: feature/14584

Comment on this article \| View comments \| Email this Feature
News :: Peace
Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P	Current rating: 0
by Ricky Baldwin Email: baldwinricky (nospam) yahoo.com (verified) Phone: 217-328-3037	08 Dec 2003
Once more, peaceful protesters at AWARE's Prospect for Peace demonstration faced an angry motorist driving along the sidewalk and a hothead cop with a tin ear for the US Constitution.
Champaign- Anti-war protesters on North Prospect this week faced vehicular assault and belligerent police yet again as the situation in Iraq and Afghanistan continues to deteriorate. The Anti-War Anti-Racism Effort (AWARE) has been demonstrating on North Prospect against the Bush Administration's "war on terror" since shortly after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Twenty-five protesters gathered peacefully on the sidewalk after 2 pm on Saturday December 6, holding signs that asked, "How many soldiers died today?" or proclaimed, "War is a dead end job!" Red, white and blue signs that read, "Peace is patriotic," also lined the walk. Suddenly a jeep traveling northbound swerved violently and jumped the curb near the end of the protest line. The young white males inside gestured angrily at the protesters, showing them fists and middle fingers as the jeep drove along the walk approximately eighteen inches past the curb. The protesters quickly fell back out of the jeep's path and no one was hurt, but the jeep's passengers continued gesturing as they returned to the street. An almost identical incident about a year ago resulted in a citation being issued to a driver of a truck, license plate "68 DAWG", after protesters kept after the police and finally spotted the truck in a parking lot and called it in to the police. When you need 'em Several AWARE activists noted the license plate -- "TRENDS 5" -- and Jan Kruse went to her car to get a phone. While they were calling the police, however, a police car arrived, and a policeman -- Officer Hawkins, badge number 35 -- jumped out and began shouting at one of the protesters who had been handing out leaflets to passing vehicles. The protester began backing up, asking Hawkins calmly where he would be allowed to hand out the leaflets. An ordinance in the City of Champaign expressly allows the distribution of printed materials in the street. Hawkins refused to answer, however, continuing instead to approach the protester, shouting angrily and demanding the protester's identification. As one of the lead organizers of the event, I approached and asked the officer what seemed to be the problem. I told him I was in charge, hoping that would get his attention, and began explaining that AWARE had already had several meetings with the Champaign police and city legal department. Both had assured us that we do in fact have the right to distribute our materials in the street -- and AWARE has agreed in the interest of safety to keep to the gutter along the curb and not walk in between cars or enter the median -- exactly as this activist had been doing until Hawkins arrived. Officer Hawkins's response was to shout at me to get back, saying I was interfering with him, "and that’s a felony!" I took a small step back, checked to make sure I was speaking calmly, and tried again. Hawkins called for backup using his shoulder radio. "For multiple arrests," he barked. Rule of law, rule of police AWARE activists had already discovered that the local police in general do not know the law, or care about it, in the preceding year. On some weekends, the desk sergeant in charge would say that, of course, protesters could leaflet in the street. Other weekends, a different sergeant would say obviously not. One Saturday, the answer was yes until the shift change, when it became no again. Two activists were eventually fined $75 each for legally handing out leaflets in the street on North Prospect. The officer issuing the citations informed anti-war activists at that time that if he had to come back, he would send everyone home. City officials made no apology for the confusion, or for being wrong, and claimed they could not get the citation money refunded. Later in the year, when AWARE held a candlelight vigil in West Side Park on University Avenue, a police car blocked off the one-way street a block ahead of the event so that no traffic could pass within sight of the vigil. When my wife and I walked past the police car on the way to the vigil, the officer inside the car told us the event was over. When I informed him that it had only just started five minutes ago, he insisted, "Trust me. We're working with you guys." He also told at least one news cameraman that he might as well leave because "they called it off." In the end, the lead organizer of that event, Jeff Sowers, had to speak to the officer's supervisor to get the major thoroughfare re-opened. Eventually over 800 people participated in local protests against the impending war with Iraq between October 2002 and May 2003, when AWARE's public demonstrations took a brief hiatus. During March, anti-war protests on Prospect often drew 200-300 or more, and counter-demonstrations regularly drew almost as many. During this time there were several unfortunate incidents, and most police officers on duty genuinely seemed to make an effort to consider the US Constitution -- with notable exceptions. One Saturday a group of young men from the pro-war side began disrupting an on-camera interview in progress with one of the anti-war protesters. They stood behind the interviewee holding signs and making noise, behavior that is frankly routine in many protest-counter protest situations. But the officer on hand that day would have none of it, and shooed them back to their side -- of the public sidewalk -- with the threat of arrest firmly expressed. The next Saturday the same student reporter attempted to conduct interviews on the pro-war side, but was met with shouts and hostile gestures from the demonstrators, calling her "the liberal media" and threatening to break her camera if she took their picture. Demonstrators on a public sidewalk, by the way, have no right not to be photographed. The officer on hand that day -- who had been parked on the grass all day claiming not to see the small pro-war contingents that were hanging around illegally in the median -- responded by threatening to arrest the reporter on unspecified felony charges. The following Saturday, a couple of bikers from the pro-war side began passing down the anti-war side, insulting people and taking their pictures. One anti-war activist, Lori Serb, insisted that she did not want her picture taken. One of the bikers insulted her and took her picture anyway. Serb angrily snatched away the camera and threw it to the ground, stomping on it -- which she has since admitted she knows was wrong and deserved a mild punishment. Mild, however, was not the kind of treatment that Serb was to get, as reported on this IMC site. A large policeman in a yellow golf shirt -- Officer Wills -- came running at her from behind and tackled her, forcing his knee into her back, without so much as calling out, "Stop, police!" Serb never even saw him coming. Nine witnesses testified to this same version of the facts, and three policemen gave three different versions in open court, but the judge convicted Serb of "resisting arrest" for allegedly not giving the cop her arm upon demand. Serb and at least two witnesses say the arm was pinned under her. The judge says it does not matter. Serb was, according to authorities, convicted of a charge for which there is essentially no effective defense. She admits her wrongdoing, for which she was never charged. But no one present without a badge -- on either side -- contradicted her account of her innocence on the actual charge. Serb was, authorities told her, lucky they hadn't charged her with something more serious -- which coincidentally would have required a higher burden of proof. Getting off easy In the end last Saturday, no one was tackled or arrested. No expensive citations were issued. No one was told to go home and think about their special crime. In fact, Officer Hawkins seemed to calm down when his backup arrived and when I finally got to tell him about our meetings with Lt. Gallo of the Champaign Police Department. Lt. Gallo. The claim was only treated seriously once I remembered the name. Lt. Gallo. In fact, Hawkins even shook my hand before he left, though he still made us move the signs we had stuck in the grass -- exactly where activists on both sides have put signs for over a year -- because the owners of the nearby Tires Plus said it was their property. The signs were closer to the walk than several utility poles, road signs and one six-foot junction box for the traffic signals. "I’m not taking anybody's word over anybody else's," Hawkins said. "Imagine," commented one anti-war activist on the scene, "what it was like in Miami." And imagine, we might add, what it's like every day in Iraq -- where US troops shoot unarmed children at peaceful protests, shoot up weddings, kill independent journalists, cordon off whole towns for house-to-house searches, censor TV and radio broadcasts, arrest union leaders for speaking out against rising unemployment -- and what it's like in Afghanistan -- where US troops this week gunned down a group of unarmed children, warlords have recaptured most of what the Taliban took from them, and even under military occupation for almost two years the streets are not safe to walk at night. Compared to such excessive violence, of course, all the protesters on North Prospect have always gotten off easy. But the very freedoms our government claims to be protecting have been harmed. Few handouts were distributed last Saturday after the officer's tantrum, and a few people have been reluctant to return to the events after their run-ins with local law enforcement. For awhile, harassment by counter-protesters also turned away some anti-war people, just as some people reconsidered their anti-war lawn signs after a few weeks of vandalism at home. Local mainstream media of course have covered little of this harassment and none of the abuse by police. In fact, the first mention in the local press that there were demonstrations on Prospect against war with Iraq was a letter to the editor complaining of the lack of coverage. But the protests have never stopped. Anti-war lawn signs were in such demand right through the end of "major hostilities" in Iraq that AWARE ran out of them every week for months. (And we were selling our signs, not giving them away like the pro-war people, who had corporate sponsorships.) Anti-war numbers at the protests were actually at their highest in 30-plus weeks during the one month that counter protesters shared the sidewalk. Pro-war attendees sometimes drove by the anti-war lines and threw cups, bottles or condoms full of mysterious liquids -- or physically attacked a passing car when the driver showed them his own middle finger -- but the anti-war protests continued, because it was still nothing compared towhat thetroops were doing in Iraq and Afghanistan. Those anti-war activists who dropped out for awhile have almost always come back, some proclaiming renewed determination to stand up for peace and justice. The one time protest organizers decided to take a break (over the summer), so many local people asked when the demonstrations would start back up that AWARE was forced to return to the street. Demonstrations are currently every Saturday from 2-4 pm until December 20, after which protests will be the first Saturday of every month until further notice.
See also: http://www.anti-war.net http://www.aclu.org

Comments

Disgusting Behavior: Some Suggestions
by Real American (No verified email address)	Current rating: 12 08 Dec 2003 Modified: 10:47:13 PM
AWARE has been doing an excellent job of taking care to protest while staying within the bounds of the law. The problem is the law, at least in Champaign, seems to be a very capricious thing. Then you get to the level of the state's attorney, where if you're an African-American kid from the North End who was caught shoplifting, you'll likely be facing felony burglary charges, but if you're a African-American member of the "Illini" basketball team, you can manage to carry out a home invasion and multiple felony crimes and get the charges conveniently dropped. I hate to have to say it, in these times when everyone is concerned about intrusive government spying and surveillance, but the camera can be your friend. If you'd been recoding when Lori was arrested on exaggerated and trumped up charges, I can't help but think her trial would have gone another way. And these terrorists who can't seem to stay on the road are getting scary. I would suggest borrowing the IMC's video camera on Saturdays when there are protests scheduled, having someone bring theirs, or buying one just for this purpose. It can also be a powerful deterrent to stupidity if it's obvious things are being regularly videoed. And it might make part of a good presentation if you end up having to go to the Champaign City Council to complain about capricious and unjust law enforcement. I would _hope_ (hoping against hope considering the man's previous record on civil liberties in Carbondale) that the new police chief might have some concerns about the very different standards of law enforcement practice that seem to be taking place on his watch, which is 24/7, whoever the desk sargeant might happen to be on any particular shift. And the city itself has reason to be concerned, since they recently lost a large lawsuit against city employees for violating the civil rights of a local property owner (granted that that person seems to be someone with little regard for the law himself.) And who knows how much other recent examples of out-of-control law enforcement may end up costing the taxpayers of Champaign, especillay if you get future occurences on videotape. Maybe this doens't fit your style of protest, but it has helped calm things and discourage excesses in other cases that I know of. And some screen shots will sure help to spice up excellent articles like this one.

No Threats Allowed
by ML (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 09 Dec 2003
An inquiry was made by "True American" as to why several messages that he and "Jack Ryan" have posted disappeared from this thread. Our editorial policy does not allow the posting of threats. You can find your missing comments in the Hidden Articles area of the website, where they will be kept in case they are needed for future reference. We takes such behavior seriously, even if you and the Champaign Police Department choose to treat it as a joke. I would also suggest that you both abstain from such commentary in the future if you wish to continue posting here, as continued abuse of our policy on threatening messages could lead to the suspension of your posting privileges.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by Ricky Baldwin baldwinricky (nospam) yahoo.com (unverified)	Current rating: 0 09 Dec 2003
Real American :-) Your suggestions are on the mark and a valuable tip for folks to remember. We have had video cameras at times, and not having them at the times you mention has cost us some much-needed morale. We have discussed the need again, and I assure you we will be filming from now on. Thanks again!

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by David Garcia streamer31 (nospam) hotmail.com (verified)	Current rating: 8 09 Dec 2003
Sent to: Council (at) ci.champaign.il.us Subject: Police Misconduct in Champaign? To the Mayor and City Council of Champaign: I was deeply disturbed by reports of an incident involving one of your police officers during the AWARE Prospects for Peace demonstration last weekend. Apparently a passing motorist, license plate "TRENDS 5", jumped the curb and attempted to run over some of the peaceful demonstrators. When the demonstrators tried to report the incident to your Officer Hawkins, badge number 35, he responded with screaming abuse and threats against them, the intended victims. From the account of a number of similiar incidents over the last year, it would seem that your police department has a pattern of harassing and attempting to intimidate American citizens seeking to exercise their constitutional rights. You should be aware that such local abuses of power do not go unnoticed by the larger world. The account of last week-end's incident went up on a global news network. Officer Hawkins' name and behaviour, as well as that of the city of Champaign, have been brought to the attention of a global audience. You should also be aware that there are people who care deeply about democracy and about such local abuses of power. As I still have family in Illinois and in Wisconsin, I go through southern Illinois on a regular basis. Indeed, I was driving through the Urbana-Champaign area about three weeks ago. You may rest assured however, that I will not spend a penny for food, gas, or lodging in your city as long as you tolerate such ugly police misconduct. Sincerely, David Garcia Fayetteville Arkansas

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by True American (No verified email address)	Current rating: -4 10 Dec 2003
Are there any other witnesses than to this occurance other than people who post messages on this web site? I would like some unbiased information. Heck, this whole thing could be staged to rally the Welfare recipients. TA

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by pm (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 13 Dec 2003
Maybe I didn't read closely enough, but did anything happen to the owner & passengers in the car?

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by Jack Ryan (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 16 Dec 2003
ML, Could you please show me where and when I have threatened anyone. Sure I have ridiculed and belittled you, but not threatened. Jack

Re: Jack Ryan's Concerns
by ML (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 16 Dec 2003
Jack, As I've already mentioned, the offending post can be found in the Hidden Articles file, available at the bottom link on the right side of the main page. FYI, as in all cases where there _might_ be a difference of interpretation in how our website use policy is applied, this case was passed around among the editors for their review. No objections were raised. If you still think you have been dealt with unfairly, our mediation policy is available at: http://www.ucimc.org/info/display/mediation/ BTW as you do seem to make a habit out of doing little here but engaging in ridicule and belittlement, be advised that that such behavior can in itself, at times and if repeatedly engaged in, lead to other violations of our Website Use Policy. You would be well-advised to review it at this link and steer clear of such habitual behaviors, just like your mama probably told ya: http://www.ucimc.org/info/display/policy/

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by Jack Ryan (No verified email address)	Current rating: -3 16 Dec 2003
Dear ML, You cannot produce a threat from me, because there are none. What you practice is simple censorship, plain and simple. True American, they define a threat as: Anything that they disagree with or anything which might promote the ideals of American Society. Jack

Your Assertion Is Obviously Without Foundation
by ML (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 16 Dec 2003
Jack, You're entitled to your opinion, but like most of the rest of what you have ever posted here, it is simply that. Your latest claim that we interpret anything we disagree with as a threat to be hidden is simply a load of crap. Neither of the posts you've made today have been hidden, but neither one is a threat, even though they clearly are opinions of yours that I disagree with. Rest assured, though, if you want to go back again to making snide comments about the putative wisdom of vehicular assault, it will be interpreted in the spirit in which you made it, as a threat, and dealt with like it was the first time. Intimidation will not be tolerated here, because this website is not run by the Champaign Police Department.

Here's YOUR Threat Jack
by Muck Raker (No verified email address)	Current rating: 9 16 Dec 2003
Hey Jack, maybe your mousing finger is incapable of hitting the "Hidden articles" link, so I'll do the work for you. Here's the content of your post that looks like a clear threat to run down prostestors to me: "Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P by Jack Ryan (No verified email address) Current rating: 1 09 Dec 2003 Damn, I'm sorry TA. I got caught up in the moment and had bad aim with my Jeep last Saturday. Next time I'll try harder to keep my cool and my aim true. --end of quoted article-- Here's a link to the hidden article so you can find it yourself: http://www.ucimc.org/newswire/display/14587/index.php Now, ML and other editors, please recognize that I quote not to repeat the threat but in order to reveal Jack's true behavior that he'd like to deny. Please don't hide this post, since I think it illuminates more than it threatens. So, Jack Ryan (conveniently named the same as an Illinois Republican Candidate for Senate), explain how that post above is not a threat.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by hippiejohnny (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 17 Dec 2003 Modified: 08:32:15 AM
I remember when my friends and I participated in protests like this back in the sixties. It gave us a chance to feel important even if we wern't. It made us feel like we had a purpose even when we didn't. It gave us a feeling of superiority as we pretended we were having some kind of meaningful effect. Ahhh yes...those were the days.

Psychoanalytical Report: Hippiejohnny
by da shrink (No verified email address)	Current rating: 11 17 Dec 2003
And now I suppose you're out there, waving your flag, cursing at and giving the finger to protestors, maybe even driving your jeep up on the curb. It makes you feel important, I bet. It also sounds like your long-standing problem is more personal than political. The vast majority of people who protest are not driven by your type of narcisscism. They are there because they deeeply care about injustice and peace. It sounds like you (and I assume you are speaking only for yourself, although you speak in the "royal we" voice) are troubled by your deep seated feelings of alienation. There are now medications that can help with those symptoms.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by Annoyed Motorist (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 17 Dec 2003
I thank you for making my holiday shopping even less enjoyable. Not only do I have to deal with idiots in the stores, parking lots and roads. But now I have to explain to my son why people are waving anti-US signs and mutilating the US flag with peace symbols. Merry Christmas son, those are people who love the Iraqi's more than they love their own country. Thanks alot!

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by Robert Porter rporter (nospam) newtonbigelow.com (verified)	Current rating: 5 17 Dec 2003 Modified: 10:25:12 AM
Well, Annoyed, maybe it's time to explain to your son that, in a democracy, the citizens have the right to free speech. That means that people get to criticize the actions of the president. This is one of those things that's supposed to make us happy and proud to be Americans. One day, your son may be so outraged by government policy that he too will want to go out and protest. Let's make sure he still has that right when the time comes.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by pm (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 17 Dec 2003 Modified: 11:17:54 AM
Interesting... A father teaching his son that it's OK for the President of the USA to lie in order rally a nation to war. "Son, people who criticize their government during the busy holiday shopping season hate the USA and love Iraq." I can see how that could annoy a busy shopper.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by hippiejohnny (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 17 Dec 2003 Modified: 10:56:17 AM
My point is that these protests are meaningless in that they will change absolutely nothing. What type of effect do you really think this will have on U.S. foreign policy? The only purpose I see is that it makes the individuals taking part feel like they gain some semblance of control by helping to shape public opinion. Keep believing that if it makes you feel better, but isn't this is the same hope that keeps people praying to god? Do you also beleive that you can change the course of future events by petitioning God with prayer?

Nope
by da shrink (No verified email address)	Current rating: 4 17 Dec 2003
Nope, I don't think "you can change the course of future events by petitioning God with prayer..." Some who protest do, though, so I'll respect their opinion. My personal feeling is that prayer makes you feel better, but I'll agree it that it is a rather pointless exercise in most cases. On the other hand, public opinion is very real. It constrains the actions of our government, even when it fails to stop some of its criminality. And George W. Bush is, unfortunately, real and is influenced by public opinion. Why else would he be going through so many perverted distortions in trying to recast the reason why he really attacked Iraq? Because, hippiejohnny, he also thinks public opinion is real and certainly a factor in his re-election chances. Liars worry about such things. You can pretend that nothing ever changes. Stalin would have loved you as a subject. Don't rock the boat, keep you head, all that good stuff. I would prefer to embrace genuine American values and believe that the opinions of the citizenry do matter. My questions to you is, if you don't even believe in that, why are you wasting your time here arguing? It'll change nothing anyway, right?

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by True American (No verified email address)	Current rating: 7 17 Dec 2003
Some valid points being made on this subject (especially by Mr. Ryan... what a guy!). If in anyway my previous posts were taken as threats I am sincerily sorry. I was not trying to threaten anyone. I do not agree with someone mowing down helpless Liberals with his Jeep. I think giving them the 1 fingered salute is OK though. I think driving a vehicle with one hand while jumping a curb is a difficult task. The driver should be checked for possible off road races (after he serves jail time that is). I am not threatening anyone in this post. I also would like to know if there has been any word from the Champaign police dept. about this. I am curious... TA

Annoyed Motorist
by JM (No verified email address)	Current rating: 1 17 Dec 2003
I sympathize with 'Annoyed Motorist' and I agree with 'hippiejohnny'. The protesters are a distraction to drivers and I don't think their views and actions will change anything. If you have a view on this subject than great. It also is a great thing to voice your opinions. Don't forget though, those rights you are excercising were given to you by a nation that went to war. Those same rights you are practicing are now being used by the Iraqi people for the first time in 50 years. How do you put a price on freedom? Whatever the motives for the war were, don't forget who the beneficiaries are... The Iraqi people. Their freedom was paid for with American lives. I for 1 am OK with that. I think protesting the Champaign police departments tactics would be a better cause to protest. That protest might actually enact some changes.

Iraqis DO NOT Have The Right To Protest
by JF (No verified email address)	Current rating: 5 17 Dec 2003 Modified: 12:02:19 PM
> If you have a view on this subject than great. It also is a great thing to voice your opinions. Don't forget though, those rights you are excercising were given to you by a nation that went to war. Those same rights you are practicing are now being used by the Iraqi people for the first time in 50 years. Um, if you're paying attention, you'll have noted that the Iraqis don't have the right to protest. They can only protest if the protest is "authorized" by the CPA, and unauthorized protestors have been shot at and in some cases killed by U.S. military forces. For an example see this article: http://www.ucimc.org/newswire/display/14650/index.php and this one: http://fairuse.1accesshost.com/news1/fisk3.html The idea that Iraq is some kind of utopian democracy as a result of the U.S. occupation is pure fantasy, and arguments based on that falsehood are propoganda.

What????
by JM (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 17 Dec 2003
Propaganda? Why is it that people wont give Democracy a chance in Iraq? Are you people so cynical that you have no desire to see if it will work? You quote articles that are extreme leftist to justify your point. I wonder what will be said if Iraq trully becomes a Democracy... There will be constant talk of 'its a puppet government' or 'its run by the CIA' or whatever. If there would have been a Democrat in office while this were going on and these same circumstances were happening you would be saying what a great job the President was doing and how the Iraqi's had such a better life. I would also agree with you (and the President). Are you people so greedy with your freedoms that you don't want anyone else to share them? I guess Life, Liberty and the persuit of happiness does indeed only apply to Americans. Remember though, our first constitution didn't work. We can't expect their first to work right away either. This applies to whatever political party is in the oval office... you can quote me on that one!

Iraq Is Not CURRENTLY A Democracy
by JF (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 17 Dec 2003 Modified: 12:29:38 PM
> Propaganda? Why is it that people wont give Democracy a chance in Iraq? Are you people so cynical that you have no desire to see if it will work? You quote articles that are extreme leftist to justify your point. It's simply not accurate to claim that Iraqis currently enjoy the same freedoms in Iraq that we enjoy in the U.S. I'm not cyncial. I'd love democracy in Iraq. But I don't think anyone can seriously claim that there is currently democracy in Iraq, or that Iraqis have the same rights we have here in the U.S. For instance, U.S. citizens do not have to get "authorization" in order to protest. Iraqis do. Do you dispute that? If so, you're misinformed. Or are you telling me that those are comparable rights? If you are, you don't understand rights. It is incoherent to claim that people who accurately view the current situation in Iraq as non-democratic are somehow therefore not interested in democracy. In my case, I'm interested in democracy and I would like to see it in Iraq as soon as possible, so that Iraqis can enjoy the rights they currently don't.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by JM (No verified email address)	Current rating: -2 17 Dec 2003 Modified: 12:47:44 PM
I never claimed that Iraq currently is a Democracy. I stated that they are able to practice freedoms that have not been available in 50 years (I am referring to peaceful assembly). I do not confuse peaceful assembly with pro-Saddam loyalists firing rifles in the air chanting anti-US slogans. Peaceful assembly is cheering in the streets at Saddams capture. Your second site that you provided a link for is slightly slanted I would think... an anti-war Englishman can hardly provide an unopinionated view. I wonder if he has ever been shot at? After being under those circumstances for that length of time I can only say that our troops should be defensive and aggressive when dealing with Iraqis. You don't know who your friends or your enemies are. If your son or daughter were over there how would you want them to act? I would want my son/daughter to be as safe as possible and to never compromise their own safety (or the integrity of the mission). The English journalist would no doubts disagree with me... I guess that would be another difference between us. One other point. The authorization the Iraqi's need to begin a protest is to ensure American soldiers don't take the rally as a staging of insurgents. Which in itself I agree with. We cannot allow American soldiers to make judgement calls on what is a lawful assembly and what is a coordinated attack. It leaves too many variables open. I would think you would agree with that? The permission to rally is passed on through the chain of command to individual units and then passed to whatever units are on patrol.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by JF (No verified email address)	Current rating: 5 17 Dec 2003 Modified: 01:37:07 PM
> I never claimed that Iraq currently is a Democracy. I stated that they are able to practice freedoms that have not been available in 50 years (I am referring to peaceful assembly). No, you claimed that "those same rights you are practicing are now being used by the Iraqi people for the first time in 50 years." But Iraqis do not have the same right to protest that U.S. citizens have. You said "those same rights", and I'm calling you on it. > I do not confuse peaceful assembly with pro-Saddam loyalists firing rifles in the air chanting anti-US slogans. Peaceful assembly is cheering in the streets at Saddams capture. You really don't understand rights. The right to protest is not contingent on which view you hold, as you imply. Also, note that anti-Saddam protestors were also firing rifles, so that doesn't distinguish the two groups either. > Your second site that you provided a link for is slightly slanted I would think... an anti-war Englishman can hardly provide an unopinionated view. But we're not talking about opinions. We're trying to establish, factually, what rights Iraqis have. Are you impying that the facts in the Independent article are inaccurate, or are you just trying to discredit the author so you don't have to address the facts? > One other point. The authorization the Iraqi's need to begin a protest is to ensure American soldiers don't take the rally as a staging of insurgents. Which in itself I agree with. We cannot allow American soldiers to make judgement calls on what is a lawful assembly and what is a coordinated attack. But we are allowing that. Unauthorized protests against Saddam have been allowed in recent days, and the people who made the judgment calls were U.S. soldiers. > It leaves too many variables open. I would think you would agree with that? The permission to rally is passed on through the chain of command to individual units and then passed to whatever units are on patrol. You're not describing the right to peaceably assemble. You're describing martial law. That's my point. You need a refresher course in civics. Not to mention rhetoric.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P

by thorn
(No verified email address)

Current rating: 5
18 Dec 2003
Modified: 01:30:49 AM

Hey, I thought we were talking about the rednecks that tried to run over the true, proactive, community-minded protestors?

Don't take the bait folks; the only way to dispatch a troll, is to starve it.

I know it's very hard, especially with the pitiful way their knuckles drag the ground, and all that pride... I mean, their self-righteousness, and belief they hold "the truth" can be almost cute sometimes.

Just keep hiding 'em ML, as you see fit. All day, every day. This place is not here to serve the childish egos of our oh-so-eager local shoppers. They can cry about "censorship" day and night, those can be shoved into the archives too.

I mean, there are Limbaugh sites everywhere these pinheads could be hanging out in exclusively, impressing each other with their studied comments, but no, apparently ucimc.org had no other purpose until JackRyan&Friends decided to gift us with their enlightenment. I kind of think of 'em as fleas, or ringworm. Extremely arrogant ringworm. And it'll usually clear itself up if you just don't scratch it. I know there are some nearly incurable cases, too.

And yes, P4P serves a huge purpose. Saving American lives, saving mountains of Americans' debt, and saving dignity for all oppressed peoples.

Thorn
by JM (No verified email address)	Current rating: 1 18 Dec 2003
I guess the fact that on the home page it states the web site is a public forum escaped you didn't it? I think there are several good discussions on this web site. What fun would it be if there was only one side to every story? As for the troll comments I will just attribute that to some inbreeding on your mothers side of the family.

Facts And Arguments
by Ricky Baldwin baldwinricky (nospam) yahoo.com (verified)	Current rating: 8 18 Dec 2003 Modified: 02:50:38 PM
I have to agree that there are some interesting discussions on this website, not including the frequent personal attacks. What's most valuable, I think, is when people share facts or viewpoints that don't often appear in the mainstream media. The events on Prospect are one example. Another is the fact that Officer Hawkins (who was given the plate number for the sidewalk-driving jeep) did not so much as file a report, according to dispatch, and that Lt Gallo at the Champaign Police Department was very concerned about both the incident and the failure to report it. (So nothing has happened to the motorist yet, but I am filing a complaint against him. Lt Gallo confirms that vehicular assault is still serious, even if no one happens to be hurt. I expect at least a citation, as before.) Groundless assertions about Iraqi freedoms are less interesting, as are ridiculous attempts to discredit actual information on the topic by blindly lashing out at the messenger. Robert Fisk has, by the way, been shot at many times. I doubt he would claim to be unbiassed, though, as he seems honest. I doubt that anyone who has been paying attention is objective on any important matter. As for the protest of local police tactics, I happen to think it's an excellent idea. In fact, there's a local group working on establishing a civilian police review board, an obvious need. It's hard to see how protesting the war, along with -at times- 10 million others wordlwide is pointless, though. Especially since many national governments clearly would never have withheld their support without it and we would never see so many Democratic candidates for president speaking out against the war without this protest (the Democrats being historically pretty useless in general on such issues). The question of whether us anti-war loonies would be so adamant if there were a Democrat in the White House is also interesting, but not because it's an unusual opinion. It's actually the crux of mainstream political coverage: Republicans vs Democrats, and there is no one else to worry about. Actually many of us, myself included, have protested US foreign policy under more than one past Democratic president: Carter's cozy relationship with the Shah of Iran, Clinton's returning Haitian refugees and bombing Iraq, etc. We are naturally written off as crackpots because we don't fit the model. We can, however, spread a different message and image by sticking to the facts and serious arguments, in my opinion. The remarks that we somehow love Iraqis more than Americans, or some such, is not a serious argument. But in my view we must remember that a lot of people who are frightened and confused by recent world events may fall into such a belief - as a kind of emotional self-defense. The idea that this war is bad for both Americans and Iraqis is something that many people have never heard in their lives, and they have little context to understand it when they do (even though the President's religion should be telling them it is true). This, I believe, is the message we need to stick to, explain it and explain it again. As long as people are afraid that we are 'taking the other side' they will never listen at all, especially if they have a friend or family member serving overseas -- and these are the people we need to reach most. In my opinion.

Excellent Post Ricky Baldwin
by Jim M (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 19 Dec 2003 Modified: 08:11:38 AM
First of all I would like to say this most recent post by Ricky is an excellent post. You address the issues and provide opinion without picking apart someones post looking for 'holes' (Like JF seems to do endlessly). As I've stated before on the 'usefulness' of the protests. Though I don't feel the protests will change anything, the protestors are excercising their rights and that is a good thing. My feelings on this are not 'submitting to the state', they are a simple admission that in todays governments (by today I mean this day and age) The voice of one person doesn't matter. Unless there is a huge injustice that would be agreed on by an overwhelming majority of people, one persons voice doesn't matter. I hope my opinions on this aren't misunderstood (JF are you listening). An example of what I mean is this... If a rapist were terrorizing the city and molesting little kids and the police did nothing about it. A protest in that situation would bring attention to the police force and force the issue. Hopefully, it would bring them out of the donut shops and onto the streets. The war in Iraq is too profitable for many large businesses (defense contractors etc.). I do not defend the wheels of war, and I do not make excuses for actions taken by the oval office. That in itself is unavoidable. There is too much money is National Defense to cause this country to become 'pacifist'. I use the word 'pacifist' because I think that qualifies as 'unwarlike' (JF I put that in there for you). I do defend this Nation and its right to defend itself and weaker Nations. I also defend its right to uphold U.N. mandate (though the U.N. in itself is a completely useless organization which has no true authority, jurisdiction, or actual abilities to make anything better---but that is another story). The reason I address the U.N. mandates is because at the end of the Persian Gulf war Saddam Hussein agreed to meet a certain number of guidelines to satisy the cease fire state. He answered those guidelines by harassing the U.N. inspectors, gassing his own people (with gas he didn't have), executing all those people who protested against him, and numerous attrocities against humanity and the Iraqi people. The U.N. responded by placing sanctions on Iraq... which caused further suffering to the Iraqi people. I may be crazy here but if I were the leader of a country and was just smacked around pretty handily and was given the offer to stay in power if I met some guidelines... I would be kissing some serious ass!!! Inspect my country, go ahead! Hell, take some rifles, rockets and anything else you can find! Saddam is not me, we cannot deny the man deserved to be ousted. His attrocities rank up there with Hitlers. Only the number of dead differ. Can anyone on this site say that Adolf Hitler was correct in his actions? On that basis do I agree with the war in Iraq. Not for the WMD, not for the terrorist ties, not for Saddam attempting to kill President Bush, not for his invasion of Kuwait, not for the oil, not for 'racist' revenge against the Muslim people. I agree with the war because the man was evil. The people of Iraq may not completely understand what we have done now and some may think this Nation is Imperialistic. Years down the road though they will see what we have done. They will understand their freedoms. It will be a tough road getting there though. No Country in the history of the world can accomplish this except for America and her allies. This is what I believe. (go ahead and pick every word apart JF, make sure to provide plenty of links too.)

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by JF (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 19 Dec 2003 Modified: 09:27:00 AM
Jim M, you're right, I spend way too much time picking away at other people's posts, which tends to keep things off-topic. I just get so incensed when people argue from a point of ignorance, or attack people personally instead of addressing the issues. There's no need for me to pick apart your post. I don't agree with your conclusions, but you're not attacking anyone or taking a one-sided view. I agree that Saddam Hussein is a perpetrator of terrible human rights abuses. I'm glad he no longer rules Iraq. But if I take a principled stand that the U.S. and its allies must depose every ruthless dictator, then we are talking about starting a world war. For instance we would need to invade North Korea, whose leader has driven that country to a point of desparate poverty while he lives in palatial luxury and defends himself with nuclear weapons. Would you propose that we do that? I would be very concerned about the human cost and the potential other conficts that would arise.

North Korea
by Jim M (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 19 Dec 2003 Modified: 10:10:03 AM
I do not feel we need to invade North Korea. I do feel that if North Korea has accepted fuel and food from the world community in exchange for nuclear inspections and to remain free of nuclear weapons it needs to be. I also am aware that we hold the largest nuclear arsenal in the world and it is hypocritical of us to say others cannot have nuclear weapons. If North Korea agreed to be free of nuke's in exchange for fuel and food and then renigged on the agreement and built nukes. Than followed up with a threat that 'if you stop the food and fuel you will be declaring war' I feel actions must be taken. Basically we (by we I mean the world) are giving them free fuel and food for 'not being naughty'. If they in turn 'act naughty' the free food and fuel should stop. By actions being taken against them I do mean stopping the fuel and food, and trying to get China/Russia to talk some sence into them. I would not be stiff armed by North Korea. I also understand that we need to defend Japan (the only country in modern history that knows what it means to follow a treaty for peace). Nukes would not be raining down on our West coast, they would be dropping on Toyko and we cannot allow that. Both from a diplomatic view and a humane view. Military agression is never 'the best solution' and in North Korea (considering its immense military budget) it would be a very bad choice. It would cost us Hundreds of thousands of American lives. Inaction could be worse than action though, it could cost millions of Japanize lives. North Koreas leader is a man who does not rank in the history books as one of the greatest world leaders of all times. It is not our job to place world leaders in/out of power. It is our job (as part of the U.N.) as the strongest nation in the world to ensure U.N. mandates are followed. Hopefully with a coalition of U.N. countries and not by ourselves (which gets old for U.S. soldiers and tax payers. I am only justifying our actions in Iraq by the U.N. mandates that were violated and side stepped. Whether WMD are there are not the issue (for me). It is the 'middle finger' he gave to the U.N. and the attrocies I have issue with.

What Is Evil? What Are We Waiting For If It Is In Our Midst?
by ML (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 19 Dec 2003 Modified: 10:22:13 AM
Glad to hear the discussion is taking a turn toward the facts. Let's look at some of what JM has said and see where the conclusions lead us. It is true, as JF has noted, that starting wars to take out evil could lead to a bottomless pit of war and suffering. And most of those who will suffer are not responsible for the evil rulers they live under. Why did we go to war, according to JM? He says it was "Not for the WMD, not for the terrorist ties, not for Saddam attempting to kill President Bush, not for his invasion of Kuwait, not for the oil, not for 'racist' revenge against the Muslim people." Interestingly, he hits the truth right on the head, by saying it is because "The war in Iraq is too profitable for many large businesses (defense contractors etc.)" To me, the making of war for profit is the moral equivalent of Iraq invading its neighbor Kuwait for its oil, which is where Saddam had his falling out with his sponsor, the U.S., back in 1990. To me, this _is_ evil. I'm unsure about what JM feels about this, but maybe he can tell us. One thing I know for certain. Before we go around cleaning up the world of evil, we need to satrt at home and clean up our own evil leaders, who make war for the profit of their campaign contributors/sponsors. We are the ones responsible for Bush remaining in office, despite the evil reasons he has made war on another evil man. That, JM, is why we protest. I gotta agree that it is unlikely that the majority of the American public is pacifist. But you are mistaken in thinking that it is only a small minority who oppose this war. Despite the view of some Republicans that they represent the majority view in this country, whatever you think of the outcome of the legitimacy of the outcome of the 2000 election, it is clear that Republicans hold power by a knife-edge. There was no landslide or mandate fro Bush to think that his views represent the majority of Americans. At best, he repsresnts just less than half of the population. And polls show that Americans have very mixed feelings about the war. Given the fact that most of the media gave almost unquestioning support to Bush when he went to war, when people hear the facts, they often easily come to the conclusion that the war was unjust and the reasons for it ridiculous. I think what JM and others who don't like the protests (whatever he may say about our right to do so) is that they know the house of cards that has been built to justify the war is liable to come tumbling down at any moment, that the scandalous nature of a war based on profit is an idea that a majority of Americans will reject. JM knows the truth. He has said so here. Why does he have a problem with other people wanting to point these facts out to the public? I'm not sure, but it looks to me like he and some others are way too comfortable with the evil in our midst, that we (or at least him and his buddies) are responsible for, that he is all for cleaning up the evil abroad, while ignoring it when it is politically expedient. But if he wants to clean up the world of evil, I would suggest that the way to avoid hypocrisy in doing so is to start at home.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by JF (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 19 Dec 2003 Modified: 10:36:21 AM
> I am only justifying our actions in Iraq by the U.N. mandates that were violated and side stepped. Iraq is not the only country that has violated U.N. security council resolutions. For a list, see this document: http://www.vicpeace.org/fact-sheets/FactSheet6vpn.pdf You're going to have to come up with another justification. Since Iraq didn't actually have WMD, its failure to comply with the resolution was no more threatening to the world community than many of the violations listed in the linked document. It amounted to a bureaucratic dispute over accounting for past weapons programs. Which I think no one can seriously argue justifies invading and occupying a country. Basically, the first Gulf War and a decade of sanctions worked, reducing Saddam's offensive and defensive capabilities to the point that the Iraqi government was easily overwhelmed by the U.S. military, and no WMD were used on anyone during the invasion because Iraq didn't have any to use. Remember that the justification for the war at the time was that Iraq posed such an imminent threat that we could not have waited even another month or two. I cannot reconcile that with what we now know were the facts on the ground. In fact, now the U.S. has asked for more time in its so-far-futile search for Iraqi WMDs -- exactly what the U.N. inspectors were asking for when we unilaterally shut down the inspections regime and attacked. This is not a "hole" in your argument. It's a hole in your argument, with no quotation marks around it. If the U.S. inspectors discover a large, extremely well-hidden cache of WMD's, I will need to reconsider. But it strains credibility at this point to suggest that Saddam had these WMD's anywhere near the point that they could have been deployed, or that we had even reasonably accurate intel on them, but that we still somehow haven't found them. I mean, we found Saddam in a hole in the ground, but we can't find the WMD's? Come on.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by Jim M (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 19 Dec 2003 Modified: 11:10:50 AM
My statements about the reasons for war were my own and not associated with the political reasons/military reasons/financial reasons you claim. I gave my honest opinion on the war and why I agreed on attacking Iraq (which was to overthrow Hussein and give freedom to an oppressed people). That is my feeling... not some political catch phrase or rhetoric. I also never said the express purpose of the war was financial. I said (unless I didn't make it clear) the reason for aggression on our part was (what I believe anyways) was because of the disregard Hussein had for U.N. mandates, inhumane acts against his people, and unconventional warfare against the Kurds. I did say that the wheels of war that a Democracy has are almost unstoppable. There is too much money in war to abolish it. I don't necessarily feel this war was for financial gain (but then again I don't work for a defense contractor). I know Iraq is not the only country to violate U.N. mandates, I am sure we have done our share. I am only adressing this issue with my own beliefs. I also never said I believe only a small portion of the population is against the war. Actually I believe that number to be in the 50-60 percent range. I also feel the need to remind you that I never said I was against the protestors. I said that I didn't feel their actions would change foriegn policy. I feel it would be more advantagous to protest the Champaign police departments handling of the whole situation. I do feel there were serious shortcomings in the CPD's protecting/serving the public in this situation (did you get that ML and JF????) Now, hopefully I have explained my points in a way that won't require more cut/paste from JF. My post originally was to say that Ricky Bladwin has a very good article... I guess that point has been lost too.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by JF (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 19 Dec 2003
With all due respect, Jim M, this isn't about our opinions. Sure, our opinions are relevant, and we're all free to share them, but primarily this whole site is about getting information out there that wouldn't be out there otherwise. The web is crawling with opinionated bloggers. But the IMC, if it's working right, is providing news and information that wouldn't be there otherwise. That's why the IMC covers anti-war protests -- not primarily to promote the opinions of the protestors, but because no one else covers those protests. Or if they do, the coverage leaves out some relevant pieces of information. And that's why I spend too much time picking people's posts apart. Because often, people post opinions formed on speculations, half-truths, or deceptions, and there is a real need to correct those factual problems so that we can all speak from a point of being informed rather than just showing up, reasserting our opinions, and not learning anything. And believe me, I don't think I've got all the answers. In order to argue against opinions I think are unfounded, I usually have to do some research by googling or searching for a reference or two, and I learn stuff that way. That's the point, for us to gain some new knowledge, not just assert our opinions over and over again, in the hopes that someone will agree with us.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by anon (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 20 Dec 2003 Modified: 05:11:46 PM
"The voice of one person doesn't matter" - Jim M. Total cop-out, you gutless armchair general. This single statement, illustrates to me that Jim M has no grasp on reality. This is the No.1 most popular, most intellectually lazy, and weakest "fact" you�ll see bandied about, to justify just sitting on the couch - "that's just the way it is". Until someone loans you some intelligence, or even a little charitable portion of "hope", please step aside Sir, your windbag bulk is doing nothing but impede those true American citizens that have learned... great changes come from small groups of dedicated people, even a single person. You disgust me. An "American" you call yourself, I'll bet you love the word "patriotic", too.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by True American (No verified email address)	Current rating: -2 21 Dec 2003
Now you've gone and done it. You people claim to use a voice given to you by your rights and then you turn on someone who doesn't share your own dilluded views of the world. JF, you my friend are full of opinions (and shit). Every post you leave is soaked through with you Liberal, Socialistic opinions. You dare cut on someone else who is stating his opinions, maybe a bit too moderate for my taste I will give you, but opinions none the less. Read the posts on the Traitor Deidre Cobb JF. You complete dumb ass!!! Its full of opinions. Now to Anon, or onion from now on. I haven't read one intelligent argument in your entire post. A matter of fact I scanned the entire site and couldn't find one shred of intelligence in any of your posts.... shut your face! You insult other people and probably don't have the balls to do anything remotely close to National service. In the words of the great Jack Ryan... shut up nut sack. I stated my views on the vehicular assault issue... several people have. If your views differ than fine. Dont attack people to stating their views. Stinken Liberals anyways. What you people figure you will lose the next election too so now you decide to get nasty? Merry Christmas you bunch of beligerant assholes!

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by Lance (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 21 Dec 2003 Modified: 07:39:37 AM
> "don't attack people to stating their views." On 12/09, you publicly advocated vehicular assault against people for stating their views, and mentioned something about a grenade (hidden). What has been your National Service?

TA=Heaping Helpings Of Hypocrisy
by Real American (No verified email address)	Current rating: 8 21 Dec 2003 Modified: 10:29:51 AM
TA, First off, if you are going to use big words like deluded, at least learn how to spell them. Then I'll note that you have done nothing _but_ attack people for their opinions since you first darkened our door. Yet you expect everyone else to just suck up your crap while you continue attacking them for their responding with facts to the usually unsupported opinions of you and your fellow freepers. I could go on, but since the whole point of your presence here is to troll the site by making unfounded accusations at others of exactly what you constantly engage in, I will just note that those like you who have shown themselves to be nothing but hypocrites also have nothing substantive to add to this conversation. Try some facts next time you want to express an opinion, then you are less likely to keep making a fool out of yourself.

Real American...ya Right...
by True American (No verified email address)	Current rating: -3 21 Dec 2003 Modified: 11:18:26 AM
I was under the assumption we were not supposed to post opinions here? Which is it? Is this site intended to address news and people respond with view points and opinions or is it just that everyone sits around and says 'yep, yep, thems some bad happenings in Iraq'? I respond with the same tripe that your fellow Liberals attack with. I probably enjoy it more than they do. You yourself have engaged in enough attacks for both of us. Don't presume to address my posts. When some wishy washy moderate like JM posts a message and appears to be having a conversation with someone and a pussy like 'anon' attacks him I think thats weak. As for my service I served with the 1/44 ADA out of Da Nang in Vietnam. My opinions on the vehicular assault were more of a humorous little post. I don't even own a grenade. Several rocks in my garden maybe... no grenade. Is the real problem here that you people want your little toys and nobody else can play with them? Are you so insecure about your views about taxing the shit out of the wealthy, free money to the poor, aborting babies in every hospital, locking down all the guns, and putting this country in some kind of moral black hole you don't want to let someone express their views? Very weak... very weak indeed...TA

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by Mollie Post (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 21 Dec 2003
I think Jim M.'s views are his to share. We can either skip over them or respond. He should have the right to express them though. I personally skip over them. I enjoy reading True Americans post though. Its hard to believe someone as opinionated as him lives out side of a drug rehab center-Rush- I hope TA doesn't live anywhere near a school. He seems like the kind of guy who probably owns an arsenal of weapons, I wouldn't want the kids anywhere near the lunatic.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by onion (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 21 Dec 2003
True American: "...the great Jack Ryan..." That says it all. I rest my case. Hey, look over there, Limbaugh's on the teevee!

More Response To The Hypocrite
by Real American (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 21 Dec 2003 Modified: 12:17:06 PM
Nobody said you couldn't post your opinion here. Just don't expect a lack of response when you say something stupid. I think the point that JF made, which you seem to have a lot of trouble with, is that opinions -- without supporting facts -- are very weak statements indeed. Which is the case with nearly everything you post, TA, and, unfortunately, like almost the entire case for the sorry spectacle of bullying called a war that is going on right now in Iraq. We didn't liberate those people, we just changed the dictatorship to one more to Bush's liking. And apparently yours, too. What Indymedia is, since you obviously haven't figured it out, is a forum in which alternative views of the news are posted and discussed. You're the deluded one, if you expect to talk shit here by bringing in the same stale BS that Rush and the legions of other pompous windbags do that permeate our culture through thousands of media outlets across this country and think it will go unchallenged. If that was the case, why would there be any way to comment on an article here in the first place? Apparently what really irks you is that we have the courage to stand up to you, when you think we should all be running to hide when we smell the foul odor of your breath coming near. There is no problem for anyone to find the worn-out opinions you waste time posting here. We've heard it all before and we obviously could not care less about it. What is lacking in this country are enough opportunities to post or broadcast other opinions to offer an alternative to the nonsensical spoutings of those like you, of which there are more than enough and which far too often go unchallenged because most of the media outlets that shovel out such crap to the public do not allow anyone to dispute it, like Indymedia does. Somehow, you've taken their failure to accurately inform you that there are many people, even a majority of people in many cases, which disagree with the tiny-minded ideas you hold dear. The reality is that the loudmouthed and well-financed bozos who really believe the things that you do are far fewer than you believe. I realize this is a shock to your senses, but get over it or go back to where all you'll hear are the opinions that you feel comfortable with. Nobody attacked JM or you. The only things being attacked are your miserably weak opinions and, on the rare occasions when you actually have one, your ideas. If you don't want your opinions to be attacked when you walk in the door, slinging that shit around, then decide for yourself not to walk through that door. As for your threats, which you claim to be only opinions, there is no reason to tolerate any more of that from you. I hope they decide to pull your plug the next time that happens. It is criminal to utter the threats you made and this site should not faciliatate your illegal behavior by allowing you to repeat it without sanctions.

Real American
by True American (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 21 Dec 2003 Modified: 01:06:01 PM
I wonder dirt bag, have you ever heard of an opinion? An opinion is something you have. Opinions do not require sources. All sources show is that others share your opinions. Now, since my views are so very wrong and yours are so correct I guess there wouldn't be any people that share my views. Or I assume the entire world minus your little buddies are completely blind to the truth? 'As for attacks, I copy the shit onion wrote about Jm: Until someone loans you some intelligence, or even a little charitable portion of "hope", please step aside Sir, your windbag bulk is doing nothing but impede those true American citizens that have learned... great changes come from small groups of dedicated people, even a single person. You disgust me. An "American" you call yourself, I'll bet you love the word "patriotic", too. ' Looks like an attack to me. I completely hope some Liberal assholes come out and discuss my views or the posts on this web page. Its a right I fought for in the shithole of Vietnam. You my blind little friend seem to be having the difficult time handling my views. If others have problems with your attacking style of writing than I call them punks also. As I read past articles I find you have a nack for shooting that big mouth of yours off... I wonder, have you ever served in the military? The reason I ask is because you seem to think you have a grasp on how the world around you works. Your pathetic ass probably hasn't ever left Illinois. You sir, disgust me.TA

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by onion (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 21 Dec 2003 Modified: 02:05:06 PM
"Last Word!"... from the communist-side, just to keep the dittoheads' blood-pressure up in the unhealthy range.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by onion (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 21 Dec 2003 Modified: 02:19:09 PM
...and, I speak only for myself, not all "liberals". The dittoheads always say "liberals!" as if they've just learned a naughty word, but actually, I love the "label"!. "Bleeding-Heart Liberal", I'm quite proud to call myself that. I choose to flame you dittohead children, purely for some form of entertainment. 'Course it's not much different than shooting fish in a barrel, so I sure can't say it's a challenge. But pointing out your ignorance and glaring lack of "back-up" for your "facts" (read, blatant opinionated Limbaugh talking-points) is entertaining to some, myself included. And easy! "Arrogant ringworm" Bingo!, that's rich! Here's a link, go bash some "liberals" with your fellow- gleefully deluded sheep. Lots of studying for ya here: http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/eibessential.guest.html I expect a book report on Monday morning. With "big words", and no spelling mistakes.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by onion (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 21 Dec 2003
Oh yeah, I almost forgot, the trolls distracted me... has our Mayberry Police Dep't charged the homicidal redneck Jeep driver with anything at all, or did the slacker cop (on the scene) actually call his own brother to come run over the dedicated P4P folks? I'm baffled as to how so-called police can simply refuse to cite someone for breaking the law, on their whim, with multiple witnesses? This is legal?! How? (real question).

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by onion (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 21 Dec 2003 Modified: 02:36:26 PM
I just love it when the dittoheads cry foul over "personal insults", which is pretty much all they ever have to fall back on. My fee-wings are hu't, that was mean... you don't play fair... Yawn. It's just a travesty, isn't it? I'm laughing as I type this. The dittoheads, basically just divert any attention directed at their glaring lack of unbiased, concrete evidence to support their opinions, toward the trivial and banal, 'cause that's... all they got. ...Clinton cheated on his wife, and when put on the world stage, dodged the question. That's why the Republican Party's the one for me!... and that Ann Coulter's such a hottie, ain't she? And a true patriot to boot!

Onion Is So Right
by Real American (No verified email address)	Current rating: 3 21 Dec 2003 Modified: 03:35:14 PM
Listening to people like TA lecture us on the need for politely respecting their opinions by refraining from commenting on the asinine, pompous sermons that pass for political commentary from the Right is like having hogs lecture you on etiquette. Even if they had the slightest idea what they're talking about, they would expect those rules to only apply to you, because they get a free pass to do whatever they want in the name of "freedom." BTW, TA, I had friends who were killed in Vietnam. I also have friends who have had relatives murdered in cold blood by folks with attitudes like yours operating in death squads, put into power by the U.S.. Thus, the only gungrabbing I'm in favor of is picking one up in self-defense. Thus, I am also not a liberal, but somewhere to the left of them, although I usually respect them. I'm not in the least bit impressed with any special insight your service in Vietnam might have given you, because you have displayed none of it here, except your capacity to hate, which is thankfully not a universal result of being in the military, despite their best efforts to brainwash generations of American youth into thinking defending the Corporate Empire is somehow a noble endeavor. I also have no problem with them defending this country, but having most of the military overseas is not defense, but for the most part occupation and offense. I am fortunate to also have known many who served in Vietnam who make no special claim to it having given them a hunting license on anyone to the left of Genghis Khan. They also don't claim that their service overseas had anything to do with defending freedom. YMMV. As for my own views on supporting our troops, I think Michael Moore sums things up rather nicely about what those of us to your left think: http://www.ucimc.org/newswire/display/14773/index.php

Where's Jack?
by Muck Raker (No verified email address)	Current rating: 5 21 Dec 2003 Modified: 10:25:50 PM
Gee, what's happened to our old pal Jack Ryan? He hasn't been heard from since having to confront his own words after whining that his threatening post was hidden. Way to keep up the quality of discourse Jacky! And there is another question that lags at me: Why has ol' Jack Ryan adopted the screen name of an Illinois Republican Candidate for the U.S. Senate? Does he secretly wish he had the connections and means to actually run for senate, rather than troll websites? Or is it deeper and sicker? Maybe he actually THINKS he is the Republican Candidate for Senate! Or, even more disturbingly -- maybe our favorite troll is the real Jack Ryan, Illinois Republican Candidate for Senate! You know, it seems to me that posting all these nasty, hateful and downright stupid comments under the name "Jack Ryan," might actually HURT the real Jack Ryan, the candidate. Sure, he doesn't leave an e-mail address, so we don't know for sure WHO our troll is. But that doesn't stop Google from indexing all these instances of the name. For example, if you do a search for "Jack Ryan" and "Urbana," one of Jacky's own posts is numero uno. So,just imagine a local voter went search for anything Jack Ryan, the candidate (not the troll) said about Urbana, and this is what she finds: "Re: UCIMC Censorship Guidelines "by Jack Ryan "(No verified email address) Current rating: 9 "10 Apr 2003 "Okay, Let me get this straight. You can show pussy but you "just can't say it. Makes perfect sense. Got it. Won't "happen again. "Jack Seems like that'll really help out the campaign! Way to help out the Republicans Jack! Or, maybe I have it all wrong. Maybe our troll is actually a secret Democratic operative, doing his part to associate the name "Jack Ryan" with asinine, small minded, mysogynistic views to help work against him in the upcoming Senate race. Now, that would just be too clever -- so I kind of doubt the Dems would be capable of it. But, nevertheless, we can still help out by appending any comment or post we make with regard to Jack with the phrase "Illinois Republican Candidate for Senate." Should help OUR Jacky's posts rise in the Google rankings, and help him do his part for the Republican party!

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by onion (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 21 Dec 2003 Modified: 10:58:58 PM
What a valuable and entertaining revelation, M. Raker. I'm down with the google-washing too, right on!

Will The Real Jack Ryan Please Stand Up?
by Much Raker (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 21 Dec 2003
and a photo of Jack Ryan:src="http://www.jackryan2004.com/img/jack_waving.gif">

Will The Real Jack Ryan Please Stand Up?
by Much Raker (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 21 Dec 2003
and a photo of Jack Ryan:src="http://www.jackryan2004.com/img/jack_waving.gif">

Re: Jack Ryan, Candidate For Senate From Illinois
by ML (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 21 Dec 2003
He was confronted on this previously and, true to character, he would neither confirm nor deny that he is, indeed, Jack Ryan, Candidate for Senate from Illinois... Which in creep-speak means, "Yeah, that's me." That would be so typical of the Repugnicans to actually have some slimeball like Jack Ryan, Candidate for Senate from Illinois, seeking to represent them. The only other question is "Has he out-groped Ahhhnold?" Given his lacivious introductory foray here, salivating over the naked for peace heroines, it would not surprise me in the least.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by John K. (No verified email address)	Current rating: 1 22 Dec 2003
So is it my understanding that the majority of people on this website are against people voicing their views? You are also against open discussion and allowing people who have views that differ from yours from being heard? Also I gather the majority of the people on this site claim to be spreading news but than insult people who are asking questions about the news? Are people Nazis or what?

Your Opinions Are Welcome
by ML (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 22 Dec 2003 Modified: 11:52:37 AM
John K., I don't think anyone has expressed the thought we are "against people voicing their views." The issue has been a lack of factual information that often accompanies the verbal masturbation implicit in the Rush retreads that seem to be the main stock in trade of most of the small group of conservative commentators that have appeared here since the Freepers began targeting the North Prospect for Peace demos. Think of it this way. Making a statement that disagrees with the opinions of most of the users of this website is not a problem, but don't expect it to go unchallenged. Indymedia is very much a two-way medium. If people wish to simply repeat Limbaughisms, they really should just refrain from that and move on to where people find that fascinating, which is clearly not here. Such material is all over, from Rush, the Faux News network, the News-Gazette. People here tuned that sort of stuff out long ago and coming here thinking that approach will work in persuading people to see things from that perspective is nothing but futile stupidity. This site was started to offer a place for alternatives to that sort of monopolistic domination. It quickly grows tiresome when it is repeated here, without the benefit of addressing the the enormous body of factual information that users of this website enjoy and from which they hodl strong opinions. We are all well aware that there are people out there that disagree with us, which is why people come here, to read and hear alternatives. Unless conservatives wish to dispute the _facts_, instead of merely repeating tired old diatribes, it is unlikely that they will either be able to enagage in an interesting exchange or, which is what I assume motivates those who post such material, have any chance of persuading anyone that their opinion deserves anything other than dismissal. When Jack Ryan, JM, TA, and all the rest of that bunch tell us for the nth time that they don't like what we have to say and we should all just crawl back in our holes, they are trolling and not engaging in a conversation. They certainly have no hope of persuading anyone to see things from their prospective, if that is their objective. Try having a conversation that respects us and you will find that people are willing to listen. Come in here with the objective of insulting and shouting people down, which seemed to be the aim of the counter-demonstrators on North Prospect, and the hostility will often be returned in kind. That any of you would expect anything different is either a sign of your naivety or, more likely, your dissimulation. The antics of Ryan and TA have not helped the reaction they have drawn. They started off in this thread with explicit threats and then whined about their "free speech" being impinged upon. It is clear that their motivations in being here are not based on the generous interpretation I emntioned earlier, that of merely seeking to persuade. They are clearly here to intimidate. And we will not be intimidated. And we will also not be persuaded by the slightly more reasonable comments of JM, who tells us that we are simply wasting our time. If that was so, he wouldn't be here trying to get us to just shut up and stay home. And John, your own post does not start you off on the right foot here. Calling people Nazis on no factual basis demonstrates that your people skills are in nearly the same class as those of TA, Ryan, and the other Limbaugh clones. If you want to engage people here, then I would suggest a retraction of that comment. Neither your post nor most of those from the Limbaugh bootlickers has been hidden. If any of us was to show up on one of the numerous right-wing websites that are available, even the reasonable approach of using factual arguments to support our opinions would be extremely unlikely to go any place except File 13 after the first post or two. By comparison, Indymedia is a very welcoming place, even for those who disagree with us.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by Jack Ryan (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 22 Dec 2003 Modified: 12:46:33 PM
Dear ML and other Leftist friends, The threat attributed to me was not written by me. You will note, that many posts that I write are often followed by someone pretending to be me. The phony Jack Ryan can be easily determined in that he usually completed distorts my first statement. Secondly, he does not have the razor wit that you have all come to love so dearly. So for what its worth, I did not send that message and would never harm any of you,unless it was in self defense. I actually think the protests and the people who go out and trash the country, actually assist my cause. Merry Christmas Folks, Jack

ML
by JM (No verified email address)	Current rating: 3 22 Dec 2003
If you would care to know ML, I am fully aware that I cannot change anyones views on this website. I do not wish to even attempt. I was complementing Ricky Baldwins article (which I think I should retract based on the uproar I have caused with some of your readers). I do not share the same views as TA or Jack Ryan. My views on the protestors has again been misunderstood (either intentionally or by an incomplete explanation on my part). I complement your website and am grateful it is here. Thank you

Denial Slow In Coming, Hardly Credible
by ML (No verified email address)	Current rating: -1 22 Dec 2003
Jack, You've had plenty of opportunity to issue such a denial previously. You ignored mention of it several times. Your buddy, True American, acted like he thought it was you. My reading of the post indicates that it is exactly in the arrogant tone ("razor wit" -- not hardly) that you always use. The only razor involved is your slitting your own throat by engaging in such antics in the first place. In any case, how goes the Ryan Republican Senate campaign? I heard you trying to distance yourself from the (other) Ryan sleaze earlier today, but it sounds like just another case of denial that is hardly credible.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by onion (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 23 Dec 2003 Modified: 05:46:17 PM
Stunningly beautiful overview, ML, I'm gonna print that one out and frame it! Jeeze, I can imagine more than one forum where that could be used as the ultimate "last word". 'Course, it's not like pointing out the obvious serves any purpose whatsoever with the brown-shirts, except providing them exactly the confirmation of their existence, that they're looking for. I can't help myself from taking the bait, too often. Such sad little men, Jack&friends (J&Fs), that they feel the only people that they can force to "listen" to them, are "libruls". The kind of people that lecture their dogs. "Look at me world, I hold the truth, I'm important! You should ALL listen to me!" I mean, their circle-jerks must be getting boring to even them, that they feel like trolling here is gonna serve any purpose. Really, a large part of the motivation for turning up here, must be to convince themselves that their delusions are valid. Notice how if you allow them to distract you from the topic at hand, there's no way to "win". It's a rigged game, that they (think) they're controlling. A power struggle for mind-space, if you will. When we're addressing their indefensible "points", they've hijacked the original, topic of substance. I know I'm not telling many what you don't already know, but I find it especially pitiful, that J&Fs really don't have many talents to get through life. A one-trick pony; no back-up, and nothing but emotional provocation to try and shift attention onto themselves. That's the "sad little man" part. Daddy didn't pat their heads enough when they were young, so now they're gonna "show" the world just how important they are, with all their "knowledge". Sad, but still tiresome. In all the droppings left here over the last two years by J&Fs, I've yet to see a single "point" made that had concrete evidence to back it up. At most, some doctored stat from Limbaugh's site. As a matter of fact, across the entire WWW, you'll rarely find any actual backup for the tired J&Fs "points" you see. And the "points" are all the same; drawn from the same echo-chamber punch-list posted on foxnews.com, or pharma-junkie Limbaugh's site. Same "talking points", same smoke and mirrors to "back it up", if there's any "back-up" at all. You usually don't get too far into the J&Fs backups, because when you point out the glaring lack of substance to their "arguments", the emotional response is almost always a jab about Clinton's BJ, or Hillary's "domineering" nature, or some other such claptrap. That's ALL they have to fall back on, as is painfully apparent, time after time, after time. "Arrogant ringworm". By any other name, "Jack Ryan". Oh, and there's no way Jack Ryan the politician would post the kind of armchair general manure here under his own name. I still hold with the first hunch, which is that "Jack's" a big Tom Clancy fan, so in his little fantasy world, he's a military man that commands respect. Something even his dog stopped providing long ago. The dog got a little brown shirt too, Jack? "If you're not part of the solution, you ARE the problem!"

Onion
by Celery (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 23 Dec 2003
Sir, you are probably the worst when it comes to getting off topic. I think the gentleman True American said it best when he said "I wonder dirt bag, have you ever heard of an opinion? An opinion is something you have. Opinions do not require sources. All sources show is that others share your opinions." Maybe that is why sources aren't provided for opinions which differ from yours and your little buddies? Of course, I am sure in your great wisdom you knew that already...

Merry Christmas My Fellow Americans
by George W. Bush (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 23 Dec 2003
Dear Citizens, I would like to take this opportunity to wish all of my fellow Americans a Merry Christmas. The war on terrorism is going very well. Our sons and daughters have captured the most evil man in the world, Saddam Hussein, and brought an end to his terrorist regime. We are on the trail of Osama and will have him shortly. I think the freedoms the people practice on this web site are the reason I am so proud to be your President now and the reason I will be re-elected in 2004. God Bless you all and keep fighting for freedom. GWB

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by onion (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 23 Dec 2003 Modified: 08:17:53 PM
So tell me one more time, why (even) the opinions of J&Fs matter to anybody on this board, or to anybody anywhere, for that matter? 'Cause I can "learn from" your Limbaughism's without seeing them ditto'd here. What exactly is your purpose here, other than just wanking in front of an unwilling audience? Why do J&Fs come here, other than just to bait people for attention? To "teach" us something? To "show" us something? (yeah, their shriveled little...) There are lots of other places to find like-minded sheep to bleat with. Of course some of the J&F losers are actually going on "hunting trips" to "librul" boards, for the sole purpose of trolling for emotional reactions, which they then hold up to each other as some kind of brave accomplishment. The oh-so-refined world of the brown-shirted trolls. Go Team! We all know exactly why J&Fs keep turning up on this board. Because Daddy didn't give 'em enough attention, so they're going to "demand" it here, any way they can. They really should see a therapist, just like several people have recommended to poor "Jack". Or medication, or both. Most likely, our "J&Fs" are really just "Jack" and his demented Uncle, posing as their "own support group". Just another part of the sad little world they build for themselves. Big thinkers; we should be thankful they've chosen us, to share their "original" opinions with. Trolling the librul boards gives 'em some reason to go on living, I suppose. Truly pitiful human beings, that this activity takes up such a large part of their day-to-day lives, "hating libruls" and "proving us wrong". Just like a dog licking himself. Hey, what's the deal with our Mayberry P.D., are they gonna do anything about the homicidal redneck, or what? Any word?

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by onion (No verified email address)	Current rating: -1 23 Dec 2003 Modified: 08:40:03 PM
I guess I'm really saying, the "Jacks" that have chosen to troll lib/prog boards for their own entertainment, are fundamentally flawed individuals. In their fantasy world, this activity serves some purpose. A normal person, wouldn't expend this much energy to force people to watch him wank in public. So my suggestion -if these children can't see how their behavior serves no purpose except stroking themselves (which many are perfectly aware of)- is to delete or hide most of 'em. Block IP's, block nicks, whatever the admin feels like doing on any given day. Let 'em sue, if they feel like their manure was "censored". I'll be front and center for that "trial". I'm through playing "fair", for the cretins that only use the concept against us. We have zero obligation to allow "Jack Ryan" type posts, which are clearly nothing more than troll bait, and p*ss markings. Sweep away the troll droppings, and let 'em cry all the way to King George. All posts are logged, so it's not too hard to know which posts are coming from which trolls. Like "Jack", and maybe one other person. I'll bet one of the right-wing sites actually recommends trolling IMC boards. I don't know for a fact, but I'd put money on it. I'm far from upset, just pointing out to Jack, who I'm sure is waiting eagerly to see his name in another post, that we're laughing at you, you pitiful child! And praying for you to see the Light. It will shine on you, when you least expect it. You don't make us angry, you make us sad, for the whole human race, knowing there're still people in the world that are somehow proud of their own ignorance. How this occurs, is still confusing to me. Get a gold sticky star on your troll chart today, Jack? After lunch tomorrow, we'll have sugar cookies, and then take naps! I'll bring my new Ann Coulter coloring book!

Obsessive Onion
by Anon (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 24 Dec 2003
Are we a bit obsessive there Onion? Somebody needs a nap I think. Maybe people 'troll' this web site to read a different point of view and discuss it. Maybe if you refrained from attacking people and discussed your point of view without being an asshole you would see that. Not everyone has had years of exposure to alternate media... Some may just not have had enough time to digest the information. In short, chill out!

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by Jack Ryan (No verified email address)	Current rating: 1 24 Dec 2003 Modified: 02:17:01 PM
Dear ML and Onion Breath, Interesting how you cheaply refer to dissent as "Brown Shirts" while at the same time discouraging open discussion on a Web Site devoted to an alternative voice. I thought you all thought dissent was "patriotic". If this is the case, True American and I are the most patriotic voices on your site. Why do I come on to express an opinion? I must confess that I am interested in the 2 to 3 percent of the Dennis Kucinich crowd who for whatever reason have not taken advantage of the incredible gift as an American Citizen, and wasted it. I am suspect of people who, as a reflex, automatically take our adversary's side whenever a world dispute happens. Of course, this anti-war message, is only expressed when a conservative occupies the White House. As for the continuous accusation of being Nazis, I believe that is an intellectually lazy statement. If this were the year 1939 or 1941, would you not be out protesting our war against Hitler? Perhaps not, since you would have been on the side of any enemy of the Soviet Union. Who defeated them, by the way? Oh yeah, it was Ronald Reagan. Are you guys still upset at that? Get over it. Again, ML, the threat that you attribute to me, is not me. My denial came late, because I was out making money. I realize that is a foreign concept for you folks, but someone has to pay your bills and for your prescription drugs or you would be out demanding that someone else pay for that as well. Anyway, Merry Christmas to all my leftist friends. Please enjoy the Holiday Seasons with your significant Life Partner of the day and we will resume battle on Monday. Your Friend and Conservative Provider, Jack

Police Follow Up
by Ricky Baldwin baldwinricky (nospam) yahoo.com (verified)	Current rating: 0 24 Dec 2003 Modified: 10:32:13 PM
I haven't been reading all the comments here, some of which seem to be just personal attacks of no imaginable interest to anyone. But I did notice that at least three people have asked what the police did about the sidewalk driving jeep. Fair question. I did answer this, but it's buried in my longer comment. Officer Hawkins did not file any report at all, according to dispatch. Later in the week, however, I spoke with Lt Joe Gallo, who through earlier dealings I've found to be a very sincere and honest man. He was very concerned about the vehicle and Hawkins's failure to report it. He commented that just because nobody was actually hit doesn't mean the incident isn't serious. He took the info and is looking into it. As far as I know, they haven't run across the 'suspect', but I will be checking in this coming week. Last year's sidewalk driver eventually got fined. Lt Gallo was also concerned about Hawkins's behavior with regard to the leafleting. Aside from the US Constitution, there happens to be a Champaign City ordinance that specifically says we can do this, and last year we met with Lt Gallo and a rep from the City Legal Dept after our earlier problems - and they wrote a letter stating that we can do this. Lt Gallo sent a memo to all police officers at that time. When he heard about Hawkins's behavior, he said he would talk to him, and reminded me that I can file a complaint against Hawkins if I want to. I don't plan to.

Jack Has My Vote And My Support In 2004 And Beyond!!!
by True American (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 25 Dec 2003 Modified: 08:54:04 PM
Thank you very much Jack. You have given me a Christmas present of such high value it brings a tear to my eye... I would like to address a few things, first off to Ricky Baldwin... If the police were so inept and put you people at risk with inaction why not press charges. Hell, if someone tried to sideswipe my buddies I'd damn well be pressing charges. Second to OnionSoup, Have you been hitting the white crosses my friend? You need to get a fucking job, I would suggest being a test subject in an anger management study, a test subject for anal lubricant, or possibly a model for condoms... 'Lebruls' like those don't they? Third to ML, for all the free speech shit you yak about, you whine more than anyone about keeping with the Leftist views on this site. I personally grace this site with my humor and intelligence to hear what others have to say. I enjoy debating the issues, or talking about them if the views aren't too wacked out. Fourth to JM, grow some balls and quit simpering to these damn Socialists!!! They have their little radio stations and their little agenda's, don't soften your views for them or anyone else!!! Stick to your guns and defend what you believe in! Vote a straight Republican ticket and watch the world become a better place. Thank you again Jack, your a patriot and a model citizen! Merry Christmas. TA

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P

by onion
(No verified email address)

Current rating: 0
26 Dec 2003
Modified: 08:51:32 AM

So "True American" never did tell us why we're supposed to care about his so-wise insights.

Know why he hasn't? Because we all know the answer - blowhards with indefensible opinions are a dime a dozen, and trolling boards to "prove" his own importance is all he's got.

Probably about all he's got in his sad little existence, as well. He's a real "important person" on ucimc.org, ain't he?

"...The new phone books are here, the new phone books are here, I'm somebody now!..."

'Cause it would appear that his brilliance is only important to one person - himself. I've passed semi-conscious homeless wino's with more insight and intelligence than TA's ever displayed, in any of his oh-so-valuable post he's "gifted" us with.

hitting the white crosses...need to get a f*cking job, ...anger management... an*l lubricant, ... condoms...

Hmmm, where's his head? In addition to being buried firmly up his own...

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by onion (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 26 Dec 2003 Modified: 09:29:23 AM
...and all the whining about, "dissent and discussion are what I came here for, and what I thought the IMC is all about..." is NOTHING but more troll bait. Another tired and childish attempt at keeping "the game" going from J&Fs. In fact, on boards that become infected with these pinheads, that's probably the top "defense" they always fall back on - "...you claim to be anti-censorship and to be open to opposing viewpoints...". More bait, more game, real old. And completely unoriginal. The trolls don't come here for "discussion", at all. That they claim to, repeatedly, is nothing but more worthless troll babble. It's what they do. It's almost an art. And this childish game is obviously one of their only talents. Baiting people into giving them some attention, like right now.

Onion Needs Some Grief Counseling
by JM (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 26 Dec 2003 Modified: 11:17:55 AM
Onion, you really need to calm down a bit. You have been driving this 'troll' thing into the ground. Everyone knows why some people come to this website. You've been beating the troll thing like the police beat Rodney King! My goodness... Did Santa not bring you any toys or what? The ol' coal burning stove working some overtime? Wow... If you are referring to me as being a troll and are presuming to tell me why I visit this site I would say that you have no clue. If your weren't referring to me than I appologize for adressing it. You push the envelope as much as TA ever has. By constantly giving attention to the posts you draw more criticism. Maybe if you addressed the issue and moved on, your anger could cool a bit? I have to admit though, it is kind of funny reading some people's posts when they get their feathers ruffled. I do enjoy reading others points of views. I enjoy thinking on the topics brought forth by UCIMC. I also have found myself saying 'Thats an interesting point, I will have to think on it at length'. That is the reason I visit this web site. I guess that would qualify me as a troll wouldn't it? Which view do you actually hold? UCIMC as an exclusive political club or UCIMC as an independant media outlet which addresses news and issues from a different point of view and allows and encourages discussion on said issues? If it is an exclusive political club, I can read CNN as well as I can read UCIMC.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P

by onion
(No verified email address)

Current rating: 0
26 Dec 2003

Troll "explanation" No.2, standard bait: "Why are you so annoyed about my posts (trolling)?... I was only trying to discuss things and learn something, not bait anyone, you're just overreacting...".

See how the more you point out their game, the more they try to put the blame on those doing the pointing? Almost like King George's court! Yawn. Here's a typical "discussion":

Did Santa not bring you any toys or what? The ol' coal burning stove working some overtime?... I would say that you have no clue....Maybe if you addressed the issue and moved on, your anger could cool a bit?...it is kind of funny...when they get their feathers ruffled.

So, J&Fs, you keep saying you only come here to learn and share, why don't you post a few URL's to some of these "intelligent discussions" you keep crowing about? Come on, show me some examples where you're not doing exactly what we know you're up to, that is, just juvenile trolling? Put your "record" where your childish talk is. I don't expect a single URL to be provided, because there aren't any.

There there, you got another pat on the head from me, didn't ya? You're so important, so aware, and such a valuable participant on this board, aren't ya? This place wouldn't be what it is, without the dittohead parasites we've become infected with. Such a tired, lame ol' game. It would seem to be their only purpose in life - making their "points", and showing us how smart and important they are.

Blah, blah, tele-blah...

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by JF (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 26 Dec 2003 Modified: 04:08:04 PM
While we are bickering about whose ideas are the most worthless, relevant things are happening in the world. Al Qaeda claims that it is planning an attack bigger than 9/11, scheduled for February at the latest. http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=YHAZVKVHPIWXECRBAE0CFFA?type=worldNews&storyID=4046690 The nation's terror level has been raised to Orange, which casts doubt on administration claims that we've got the WOT under control: http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=reutersEdge&storyID=4039262&fromEmail=true Sunnis and other insurgents are killing U.S. soldiers: http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/12/26/sprj.irq.main/index.html http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/1226-01.htm And in the political arena, Sunnis are organizing to build up a power bloc: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/25/international/middleeast/25CND-IRAQ.html?ex=1073380341&ei=1&en=d09a205910c40a5a Iraqis are continuing to die in the fighting: http://fairuse.1accesshost.com/news1/fisk3.html There has been a second assassionation attempt on Musharraf: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/12/26/wpak26.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/12/26/ixnewstop.html The Israel-Palestinian situation has worsened with Sharon proposing to act unilaterally, which was followed by a deadly suicide bombing and Israeli retaliations. The PFLP claimed responsibility for the attack: http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/376094.html In Afghanistan, the U.S. is not exactly pushing glorious republican democracy, but instead trying to more or less install Karzai: http://www.gulf-news.com/Articles/Opinion.asp?ArticleID=106330 The WMD's are nowhere to be found, and the U.S.'s rationale for the war continues to unravel: http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1224-02.htm I think there are more important things going on then trolling IMC and complaining about people who do. The trolls obviously aren't paying attention to information of the kind reported in these links, or at least are paying extremely selective attention based on their ideologies, which are either dangerously naiive or cynically insincere. Complaining about trolls like I just did does nothing to bring any of the relevant information to light (like I did by posting all those links), but just provokes them to unfairly accuse the complainer of persecuting them, as if complaining about what someone says is somehow equivalent to persecution, censorship, or represents any power other than simply the power to complain, which everyone who posts to this site has, trolls and troll-complainers alike. This site really is an open publishing forum whose policies really are decided in open meetings by consent, no matter how much people claim they're being censored. The more posts they make claiming their views aren't being heard, the less right they have to claim that their views aren't being heard, because each post is yet another opportunity for everyone to hear their views.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by Jack Ryan (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 28 Dec 2003 Modified: 11:06:50 PM
Dear Onion Breath, From this quotation: "It would seem to be their only purpose in life - making their "points", and showing us how smart and important they are" It would seem that True American and I have gotten under your skin a little bit. I hope you are not sitting in your car with the engine running and the garage door closed or anything like that. Take a chill pill dude. You and your site represent 2 or possibly 3 percent of the political leanings of the country. Take advantage of what the American Dream is and what our system can offer. Then you can throw all the hissy fits that you want. Talk it over with your "life partner". The fact remains that we are in a war. A war in which 63% of Americans support. We were attacked. A link between the terrorists and Saddam has been established. You were wrong. Pull up your pants and admit it. We were right to attack both Afganistan and Iraq. We did it swiftly with as few civilian casualties as possible. Our troops are still dying to save your sorry ass. The fortunate thing for us, is that Saddam can no longer see your tongue ring on CNN protesting the very people who provide you the freedom to go on this site. Take care Bud. Jack

Re: The Boundless Heroism That Is Jack Ryan
by Risa Burlona (No verified email address)	Current rating: 5 29 Dec 2003 Modified: 10:58:05 AM
I'd like to applaud the herculean courage with which Jack Ryan has once again cast aside the paltering liberal obsession with "the facts" in order to penetrate to the deeper truth. Although his contention that Al-Qaida and the Hussein regime were conneted seems to be directly contradicted by <http://msnbc.msn.com/Default.aspx?id=3741646&p1=0> , we should keep in mind that only an America-hating liberal would deny that MSNBC is a rootless cosmopolitan disinformation front secretly run by crypto-Bolsheviks and teacher's union operatives. Likewise, Ryan's brave observation that today's leftists would have supported Hitler astutely dismisses the so-called "fact" of international left opposition to the Nazis duing the Spanish Civil War (a complete fiction concocted by a cabal of traitorous bookworm egghead "historians"), and brilliantly employs a chain of loose associations and guesses to reveal a more profound reality. Let us all strive to be as logical and wise as Ryan and notice that both "al-Qaida" and "Iraq" employ the traitorous anti-family-value letter "q" in their names, direct proof of a deep alliance. As Ryan and the equally eloquent True American have suggested, "facts," "principles," "logic," and "reasoned argument" are nothing more than liberal traps that interfere with our ability to experience ecstatic spiritual oneness with our Beloved Leader in Washington. With them, I say "Down with degenerate faith in facts! Long live the deeper truth of emotional purity! Hail victory!"

Risa Burlona Needs To Learn How To Read
by True American (No verified email address)	Current rating: 1 29 Dec 2003 Modified: 12:42:09 PM
Dearest Risa, I have read Jack Ryans message many times and cannot find the words Al Qaida anywhere in it. I know this may be difficult to understand for you but I believe Jack was referring to terrorists as a general label. Not as you selectively phrase Al Qaida. I know it is difficult for dumb-assed Liberals to comprehend but the attacks against American troops are terrorist attacks. Straping explosives to yourself and running into a truck is an act of terrorism. There is a link between terrorist groups and Iraq. It may not necessarily be Al Qaida, but there are more fish in the sea than just the big Osama fish. Now, wake the hell up would you!?! I like your link to MSNBC. I consider them a viable source of media. I am sure there are credible reports there. As for your mindless blabbering about myself and Mr. Ryan and how we have no 'facts' etc. but follow President Bush mindlessly, I would say this. Is it, or is it not a fact that Saddam Hussein committed attrocities against his people? Is it, or is not a fact that there were illegal missles in his country (missles who's range exceeded the U.N. mandate)? Is it, or is it not a fact that he, on numerous occasions ignored U.N. mandates and played his little games with inspectors. To the point may I remind your shallow little self that President Hum-job Clinton fired cruise missles on Iraq. He asked for peace in the Persian Gulf war for inspections. We gave him his peace. He than renigged on the agreement by dicking with the inspectors. Therefore the cease-fire is dissolved. He asked for the second attack and he got it. President Bush is the first President since Reagan to follow thru with a promise. The terrorists and terrorist supportive states will be hunted and dealt with. One other bit of news for you Risa, Hussein was paying a reward for all Palestinian terrorists who killed Jews. I guess that is ok though isn't it? TA

Re: The Dazzing Brilliance That Is True American
by Risa Burlona (No verified email address)	Current rating: 6 29 Dec 2003 Modified: 01:37:10 PM
How splendid for you liberals that True American has gotten beyond the fussy lefty notion that "terrorism" involves attacks on civilians. Correctly discerning the deeper truth, he informs us that armed attacks on the world's largest occupying force is also terrorism. True American doesn't concern himself with the kind of picky reasoning that argues that saying we are at "war" directly contradicts the idea that our eternal enemies are also "terrorists." Many fuzzy-headed people might point out that, by definition, "wars" are fought between armies, or (at least) guerillas. Like any right-minded liberal-hater, however, True American understands that the actual definitions of words shoud not be allowed to undermine our precious feelings of National Unity. "One People, One Nation, One Leader!" should not be obscured by the wishy-washy liberal idea that words ought to have meanings. When patriotic American want to make words mean whatever's convenient at the time, only traitors object. For example, many Barbara-Streisand-besotted liberals continue to point out that Hussein's "gassing of his own people" was approved and supported by the Reagan administration: <http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/1224-05.htm>. These degenerate Leninists insist that if slaughtering civilians is "evil," then abetting the slaughter before and after the fact (by supplying it, then covering it up) ought to be considered "evil" also. These leftist dupes can never fathom the profound and nuanced ethical insight, perceived by people like the courageous True American, that "evil" always means "what someone else does." That's why True American is also a true Christian: he's a moral paragon. Bravo also to True American for showing us the one true way to impose the rapture of National Unity by also doing away with the leftist fetish of correct spelling! Only a Clintonite Big-Government fellow-traveler would point out that there are no such English words as "missles" or "renigged." You welfare-state pinkos have imposed your filthy plague of "literacy" on God's one true nation long enough. True American and Jack Ryan, to my mind, don't go far enough! Let's burn all the books--or at least all the dictionaries! Too much reading leads to thinking, which is objective disloyalty.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by anon (No verified email address)	Current rating: 3 29 Dec 2003 Modified: 01:31:55 PM
>>> Hussein was paying a reward for all Palestinian terrorists who killed Jews <<< So, on top of being a world-class scholar of history (past and present; his own imbecilic version, of course), Jack's probably a Zionist to boot! Oh, the high-quality trolls we provide a home for. Just for reference, we can henceforth refer to all of them, as "Jack" (or J&Fs), since most/all of the dittohead parasites that make "schooling" IMC readers a lifetime goal, are really all just one person. You see, the kind of trolls we've been blessed with, are just the people that not even a mother will still listen to. So they "live" here, where they think we'll have to pay some attention to their pathetic, underdeveloped, egomaniacal opinions. They bravely seek out the easiest targets of course, like any open-publishing forum. If I had (even) a penny for every delusional "fact" tossed off by Jack/J&Fs, I'd donate it all to a Palestinian anti-apartheid fund. Nice wanking distractions, and completely off topic, as usual. Yawn.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by True American (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 29 Dec 2003 Modified: 02:49:14 PM
Risa, what the hell are you talking about. When did I say the definition of terrorism was attacks on American military? You people amaze me with how you slip words and change sentences to meet your pathetic little needs. Dumbass, if you would take the time to read what I wrote instead of trying to play your little welfare supporting, life partner having, racist assed games this topic would have never gone off track. By terrorists (are you listening now?) are individuals who use terror as a weapon. They use terror as a weapon by using non-conventional/means which are not approved of by the Geneva Convention. Suicide bombers would qualify as terrorists. This is not the Iraqi army that is attacking our troops. This is terrorists and foreign fighters (which like many Liberals I know) who want to kill Americans... no matter what political party, sex, religion, or race they may be. These people would kill you if they had a chance. Understand that please!!! As for Anon 'Onion' you are probably the biggest off topic asshole on this website. You continually change the topic to meet your little agenda in the hopes that someone besides your gay roomy will pay you some attention. If you are racist than keep your racist bullshit to yourself. I doubt this website was intended to be an anti-Seministic forum. If it was than I have nothing but sympathy for those who run it. You my friend are the biggest troll on this site. As for wanting a penny for every delusional fact, what the welfare checks don't cover the lotto tickets? Get a job asswhipe! TA

Anon
by JM (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 29 Dec 2003
Though I have had a hard time agreeing with everything you have said in the past, I have found that your words contain intelligence. The reference you made about the Palestinian anti-apartheid fund shows a lack of thought and consideration on your part. Whether it was in the heat of argument or a true feeling on your part I think it is uncalled for and unclassy. If you feel others who post on this web site are immoral and unethical trolls that is your feeling. Don't post racist messages to attack them though.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by Jack Ryan (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 29 Dec 2003
Dear True American, I simply can't say it better than you just did. Nice going from a fellow patriot. Jack

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by Jack Ryan (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 29 Dec 2003
>>> Don't post racist messages <<< Please point out these "racist" messages. Sounds to me like any defense of the plight of the Palestinians, and the Zionist occupation of land stolen from them, is once again, being called "anti-semitic". Puh-leeze.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by Jack Ryan (No verified email address)	Current rating: 1 30 Dec 2003
Clearly, the above post is not from me. Interesting how I get called a Nazi and a Zionist in the same stream of messages. I guess when the leftist run out of supposed facts, they resort to the tired old insults and untruths. I have an idea about a Palestian Homeland. How about we give them some of Western Iraq. We currently own it. It is dusty and desolate and nothing grows there. Hell, they won't the difference and it will solve a major problem in the middle east. Jack

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by JM (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 30 Dec 2003
Or, here is another option. How about next time they terrorize Israel we 'untie' Israels hands and allow them to properly defend themselves. You would see a sudden drop in terrorist activities and innocent Israeli deaths.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by Russell Feingold Democratic Senator/Wisconsin (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 30 Dec 2003
The definition of apartheid is: 1)An official policy of racial segregation formerly practiced in the Republic of South Africa, involving political, legal, and economic discrimination against nonwhites. 2)A policy or practice of separating or segregating groups. 3)The condition of being separated from others; segregation. When 'Anon' wrote that he would contribute to the Palestinian anti-apartheid fund, he was saying Israel was an aparthied and was practicing discrimination against the Palestinians. There would be no difference if a person were to say 'I want to donate to the KKK anti-racial integration fund'. Say that in certain parts of Chicago and Detroit and see what happens to you. The statement was racist and uncalled for.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by eth (No verified email address)	Current rating: 5 30 Dec 2003 Modified: 12:10:04 PM
> When 'Anon' wrote that he would contribute to the Palestinian anti-apartheid fund, he was saying Israel was an aparthied and was practicing discrimination against the Palestinians. > There would be no difference if a person were to say 'I want to donate to the KKK anti-racial integration fund'. Yes, there would. Palestinians are an entire ethnic group, whereas the KKK is a specific organization of caucasians. Holding an entire ethnic group responsible for the actions of specific organizations is racist, since it unfairly implicates people outside of those organizations on the sole basis of their ethnicity. Working against racial integration is the opposite of working against apartheid, so I see no analogy there. Holding Israel responsible for apartheid against Palestinians may be the subject of debate, but the accusation is not prima facie racist, since Israel is a state, not an ethnicity. I realize it's more complicated than this, but that means that any discussion of the responsibility of the state of Israel must be similarly complicated, and the racially-identified nature of the state cannot be used to absolve it of responsibility arbitrarily, given Israel's status as a member of the international community. I am constantly baffled by the tenor of the debate on Israel-Palestine. Many supporters of Israel complain of anti-semitism while at the same time unfairly implicating all Palestinians in the actions of Palestinian terrorist organizations. It seems to me that it is ethically untenable to reject racism against one group while directing it at others. Rather, it seems to me that one should reject racism utterly, regardless of which group it is directed against. Note that I did not say "all supporters of Israel" or "all Jews" or even "some Jews"--just, "some supporters of Israel". Nor did I raise even the slightest objection to the idea that Palestinian terrorist organizations should be held accountable for their crimes. If this qualification does not convince you that I am earnest and well-meaning, then you must look in your heart for trust. Trust is the foundation of debate and peace. Mistrust of entire ethnic groups is racism and should be utterly rejected. Mistrust of states is ethically acceptable but any situation that leads people to mistrust states is a breeding ground for war and oppression. That is why it is comforting to trust states. But blind trust in states can make us victims of or accomplices in war and oppression. Those who are content to be accomplices are immoral.

Re: Vehicular Assault, Police Belligerence Back At P4P
by STM shannontaylor5679 (nospam) msn.com (unverified)	Current rating: 0 20 Jan 2005
Annoyed motorist: I hope your son will be drafted when he is 18 and be sent to some foreign war of choice for some Bush dictator and he will be killed there so that you will remember the day you belittled those who tried to protest the Iraq war. Hippy Johnny: If you really protested the Vietnam war in the 60s you should remember that the protestors were made up of a broad section of the US public and ebeven though 1million 58thousand people lost their lives for this war of choice, many more would have been slaughtered if the protestors did not hit the streets and demonstrate against that immoral war.