Terrorist Attack in SF!

protestors=terrorists?
U.S. invading..sorry…liberating Iraq=terrorism?…Nah
I never thought of it that way. Thanks for the different POV Chris.

I know who he's talking about and I'm going to post a rebuttal as soon as my coffee kicks in.

By Jove, you're right! These sick individuals need to be put in jail and then have the full force of the book thrown at them. I resepct any person with an anti-war position- it's their right- but I don't respect these lunatics and their practices. The only thing they're doing is causing precious resources to be spent on them instead of protecting the public from serious threats. It's all very sad.

The time for demonstrations was before this war started, not now. We're there and we're not leaving until we're finished.
Nevertheless, that's my opinion and if others want to differ that's what this country is all about.

(not meant to be a troll)
That's a pretty broad definition, actually, since using it you could say there's a lot of “terrorism” coming from DC, too.
About protesting during a war: well, look at what happened with Vietnam. And look at all we got from during-war protests – and I'm not just talking about classic, good music.

Since when is using your right to free speech wrong? I would have to agree with Steven's point, that definition seems to apply more suitably to the US invaders in Iraq, not the people protesting here. I am not sure how things work in SF, but here in Winnipeg we simply inform our government by regular protests at their places of power that we disagree.
I find it disgusting to read the many who think that once your opinion has been received and discarded, one should shut the f**k up, sit down, and watch it unfold. that is being a coward and lying down for those who feel they are right and everyone else has no right to speak. I believe it was Chris who I first heard say 'attack the idea, not the people'.

Peace protesters in SF with the makings of Molotov cocktails or blocking ambulance movement are:
a) Not being very peaceful
b)Not protesting to the correct people (i.e. the ones who said “Go” to the war). The San Fran police, people, or board didn't start this war.

I wonder what all the protestors against the Iraq war will say if it turns out that the majority of Iraq citizens are happy that the U.S. got rid of their oppressive dictator? Certainly the majority of Germans were glad the U.S. liberated them from Hitler.
BTW, compare the number of innocent civilians killed by U.S. bombing of German and Japanese cities (hundreds of thousands) with the number that can reasonably be expected to be killed by U.S. bombing of Bagdad (hundreds?).

Can any one tell me if any of the protesters were holding a US flag in the US .i only saw a blue banner.i wonder if anybody whom is protesting know the views of most of the people organizing the protests,those persons should be deported

Deported for what? Exercising their right to free speech?

Thats exatly how I feel! Here we are calling everyone else terrorists, but we ARE the terrorsits to many other countries including Iraq.
That's just my opinion, but I also think that we should not be protesting becasue President Bush and his political practices will not listen.

Blocking emergency vehicles and stopping people trying to get to work…. now that's class.
Smack permission granted. Make it so.

Manuel, Chris is talking about the protestors in SF, not the US going into Iraq.

The right to free speech and freedom of assembly do not allow the right to endanger the welfare of your community; i.e. the cliche of yelling “Fire!” in a crowded movie theater. It also doesn't allow for defamation of character. We've lost our fundamental knowledge of respect for society as a whole in the belief that the 1st Amendment allows us to be as rude and dangerous as we choose to be and can hide behind the semantics we choose to define free speech.

Kat,
Barring violence or threatened violence or illegal acts on the part of peace protesters, they are allowed a voice. I don't agree with them, but I don't feel that they should be deported because they don't support the war. It appeared to me as if John was suggesting quelling the voice of all protesters. Violent activists need to see jail cells.

Art, you understood my point exactly, but misunderstood my intent. I wasn't referring to John's post at all. I'm tired of hearing about destruction of property and the general “if you don't agree with me, you have no voice” attitude on both sides of the argument. Spray painting epithets on public buildings does not make the statement to me that I'm dealing with a thinking rational adult in a political debate. To me, that's the act of a juvenile deliquent who has the anonimity of a crowd to hide behind.

I agree 110%…

Gretchen, I know that, but still I like the definition and agree to that with what I said. It is also a bunch of BS to protest and make life worse for the rest of us too.

Let me get this straight. Free Speech = molotov cocktails, Free Speech = disrupting businesses, Free Speech = disrupting traffic, Free Speech = public/private property damage… I could go on and on, but I think that you can see where I'm going with this. IMHO you can yell, rant, and scream until you are blue in the face. As long as you don't put anyone or anything in danger. I agree that these protest are nothing less than small scale acts of terrorism.