Denver Imposes Restrictions on Protesters Tactics

Field commanders and generals know that the best way to win a battle is to be prepared ahead of time for any tactics and tricks the opposing side will use in a pending conflict and confrontation. Denver is making plans now for the DNC convention.

There will be no urine tossing in Denver. Nor will there be any buckets filled with feces nor "cut-proof" devices that protesters can use to thwart local police officers as protesters gather outside the Pepsi Center in Denver when the DNC gathers there to meet next month for the party's convention. Denver law enforcement and lawmakers are working together to make sure that they have as many bases covered as possible to keep protesters from blocking traffic and creating undue disturbance in the Mile-High City.

"Protesters are getting pretty sophisticated," said Councilman Doug Linkhart, chairman of the council's safety committee.

"In other cities, they're not just handcuffing themselves to each other," he said. "They put their handcuffs inside PVC tubes, which are inside concrete. They've figured out ways that keep the police from just using bolt cutters to cut them apart. They also use buckets of urine and feces and various noxious substances to pour on themselves or the police."

Denver's proposed ordinance would make it illegal to carry any "tool, object, instrument or other article" that can be used to obstruct streets, sidewalks and entry or exits from buildings or for hindering emergency equipment.

"We're just trying to very narrowly define an area where, if they have these kinds of tools and we can prove intent, then we can arrest them," Linkhart said.

Among banned items will be chains, quick-setting cement, and locking devices resistant to bolt cutters, along with containers used to transport urine and feces, and any other items that might be seen as being used as a tool for disrupting order. Arapahoe County, where some delegates will be staying during the convention, has also placed bans on items that could be used as weapons, including gas masks that protesters might be carrying to use in case of tear gas being employed by law enforcement officials for crowd control.

Personally, I'm kind of amazed at the mindset of some protesters. I can understand picketing, I can understand the chants used by marchers, but there are some things my mind can not fathom. Urine and feces? Are we talking about people protesting, or chimpanzees here? Mind boggling.

In all honesty, while I can see why there would be a lot for Democrats to protest in regards to their party, especially those who belong to such groups as PUMA, I can't really say that I see many of the Hillary Clinton supporters that would be attending being the feces flinging type.

Of course I could be wrong.

What does sinking to this level of primate behavior accomplish, really? It smells, it potentially spreads disease, and we won't get into the whole concept of that one has to actually take the time to collect containers filled with feces or urine in order to take that one pride filled moment in which they can proclaim, "I tossed my shit on a cop!" I'm sure they have a mother somewhere who would be very proud of them for such adult behavior.

Protesting in such manner does little to accomplish actual real political change. It creates a breeding ground for violence, lawlessness, and potential injury to both the protesters and public safety officials who are there to maintain order. The rare exceptions were the non-violent protests led by Dr. Martin Luther King in which he urged passive resistance. But the days of King are over, and I'm certain that he would have highly disapproved of the use of human/animal waste as a means of attempting to make a point.

I wonder if they've also banned jamming devices for the undercover officers who will be communicating by shoe phone? Just a thought.

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man

.

Is the DNC afraid of it's own base? The Denver Wall is going up.

In the movie "V for Vendetta," the notion that people should not fear their government; government should fear the people is a prevailing theme. Is it possible that the Democratic National Party has reached this level of fear of the people?

As mentioned in previous articles (here and here), there is a huge fracturing going on in the Democratic party, at the base level. Despite all attempts to put on a good face with the media and go on as if there are no problems, the DNC seems to have no illusions, privately, that there is brewing trouble.

And they are making efforts to ensure that that trouble doesn't interfere with the National Convention when it meets in Denver, making preparations to keep protesters as far away from the center of activities as possible.

The fence around the public demonstration zone outside the Democratic National Convention will be chicken wire or chain link, authorities revealed in U.S. District Court today.

That may allow protestors to be seen and heard by delegates going in and out of the Pepsi Center during the convention.

But the American Civil Liberties Union and several advocacy groups have filed an amended complaint to their lawsuit against the U.S. Secret Service and the city and county of Denver that says protestors and demonstrators may have their First Amendment rights violated by security restrictions.

It is perhaps telling that such precautions are being made for the DNC. Given the past two years of a Congress with a record of little to no accomplishment, the rift between Clinton and Obama supporters, and the continued tirades by anti-war protesters (despite the successes made in Iraq in the past year, to the point that the media no longer reports from Iraq), Party leaders have good reason to be concerned over an irate constituency. And with the rise of the Denver Wall, one could speculate further about the views of the DNC not only on the Second Amendment, but upon the First Amendment, as well.

Wasn't there another wall, once upon a time a few years back, that divided a city east from west?

Just a thought.

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man

.

Denver DNC Convention - The Eve of Destruction?

There is an old proverb that says, "Those who do not learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it." Is the Democratic National Convention this year heading towards a historical reinterpretation of the 1968 Convention?

In 1965, Barry McGuire released his hit, "Eve of Destruction", an interpretation of the world at that time.

The eastern world it tis explodin',
violence flarin', bullets loadin',
you're old enough to kill but not for votin',
you don't believe in war, but what's that gun you're totin',
and even the Jordan river has bodies floatin',
but you tell me over and over and over again my friend,
ah, you don't believe we're on the eve of destruction.

Today, more than 40 years later, we're seeing history repeating itself in many ways in this country. If a group called "Recreate 68" has any say in the matter, we will see a near replay of the 1968 Chicago Democratic National Convention played out at the 2008 Denver Democratic National Convention.

The 68 Convention was one marked by infighting of the Democratic Party's members and violent confrontations between the Chicago police, reportedly under "shoot to kill" orders by then-mayor Richard Daly, and anti-war protesters. Bobby Kennedy had been assassinated two months earlier, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. had been assassinated three months prior to that, Lyndon Johnson had declined to run for re-election as President and the nation was, indeed, on the "Eve of Destruction."

There were even suggestions, prior to the meeting of the Convention, that it not be held in Chicago, but rather in Miami, where the Republican party was slated to hold it's Convention. This suggestion was met with violent disagreement by Mayor Daly, who promised to enforce the peace and threatened to withdraw his support for the apparent nominee, Hubert Humphrey, if the convention were to be moved. President Johnson also preferred Chicago, having been rumored to have said "Miami is not an American city."

The Convention itself was filled with tension and apprehension, after a downbeat keynote address by Hawaiian Senator Dan Inouye, and as pro-war and anti-war delegations debated the issue of Vietnam. Peace protesters caused delays in the debates and their confrontations with the police lasted through the length of the Convention.

Humphrey eventually took the nomination for the party, and lost the general election to Richard Nixon, the Republican candidate, in November.

So how does this tie in to today, and the upcoming Denver Convention for the Democrats? The anti-war group known as "Recreate 68" has lost their bid for a permit for the Civic Center to the host committee for the convention.

"When things blow up because the police have to enforce a permit that the Democrats got, don’t blame us for that," said Glenn Spagnuolo, an organizer for the Re-create 68 Alliance.

"Blame the Democrats for trying to silence dissent in the city of Denver."

The lottery for permits to protest, pray or hold other events in city parks during the DNC Aug. 24 through 28 resumed Thursday after the city bungled the drawing Tuesday by accidentally leaving out some of the applicants' names.

This is just one group that is calling for a replay of the 68 convention. Former Virginia Governor L. Douglas Wilder has predicted riots if the popular vote isn't adhered to in selecting the Democratic nominee. Obama is currently leading Clinton in the popular vote.

Personally, I understand the desire for peace, and appreciate the work that is done to achieve peace between conflicting factions. Few know greater how precious peace is than those who have seen conflict. What I don't understand, honestly, is the threat of violence to promote the cause of peace. In my mind, in my way of thinking, that's a contradiction. As I've said before, contradictions can not exist. To protest, peacefully, in the name of peace, for the sake of peace, for the purpose of peace, makes a statement. To protest violently and proclaim that you are promoting peace, contrarily, seems more like an excuse to act in a violent manner for a cause that you don't truly believe in. Violent protestations for peace come across as hypocritical, and the message for the promotion of peace becomes tainted by the advocacy of those who proclaim it, but don't practice what they are preaching.

There is a time for war, and a time for peace, if one is to believe the teachings of the Bible and other ancient texts that have been handed down from generation to generation through the centuries and millennial. A time to kill, a time to let live. A time to sow, a time to reap. If this sounds like a song, too, that's because it is a song, "Turn Turn Turn", by Pete Seeger, and it was based straight out of the Bible (Ecclesiastes 3:1-8).

Regardless of the situation as it was in 68, the 08 DNC promises to be interesting in it's own right, as well. With the Clinton machine gearing up for full confrontation and a determination to remain in the race right up until the very end of the nomination process, and the continued revelations of Obama's associations and their anti-Semitic, Afro-centrist agenda's, the continued bad light he has fallen under because of his pastor (who is currently working ON Obama's campaign staff), it's sure to be a slug fest right up until a candidate is finally nominated and approved.

And in case no one has mentioned this, the possibility has been suggested that neither Obama nor Clinton could wind up as the party nominee.

Has anyone noticed how quiet Al Gore has been lately?

It definitely is winding up toward a very interesting Democratic National Convention for Denver.