community-based, non-corporate, participatory media
Letters to the POG
by Sam
Monday, Mar. 24, 2003 at 11:55 AM
Further proof that we're living in the new Red Scare.
Letters to the editor, 03/24/03
Monday, March 24, 2003
As marches by anti-war protesters turn violent, ironies abound
Like all Americans, I am closely watching the developments of Operation Iraqi Freedom. And like all real Americans, I give 100 percent support to our coalition forces who are fighting it. But what compelled me to write this letter is what's happening closer to home.
On March 20, anti-war protestors took to the streets in several cities, including Pittsburgh. Some protesters may do this because they have a sincere belief in the cause, along with a rational argument that they feel substantiates that belief. Others speak out because they are uninformed or, worse, because they are promoting other agendas. Regardless of their motives, I recognize that, because they live in this country, these individuals have the right to express that opinion.
More than 100 participants were arrested in Pittsburgh because the gathering began to take on a mob atmosphere. The marchers were involved in altercations with police, who, ironically, work to keep the peace that these protesters claim to covet.
During these anti-war demonstrations, you say the United States is a bully, and you call our commander in chief a dictator. Question: What would have happened if you'd tried this in Iraq?
Get the answer from those who know. Once Iraq is liberated by this administration and its allies, ask the Iraqi people. Grateful to exercise their new-found liberties, including freedom of speech, I'm sure they'd be more than happy to tell you.
KRISTIN PAXTON
Economy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nowhere crowd
I was both shocked and appalled at the recent "peace" demonstrations held in Downtown Pittsburgh. Why, I ask, must you peace protesters break the law to be heard? Since you are supporting "peace," why do your counterparts act out violently? Are you all that hypocritical?
Where were you when Saddam killed thousands in Northern Iraq? Where were you during the Kosovo conflict? Where were you when airplanes were flown into the World Trade Center and Pentagon?
The answer is simple: nowhere.
For those of you who said, "Let the United Nations decide," hear this: Over the past 12 years Iraq has been in violation of well over a dozen U.N. resolutions, all of which have gone unpunished.
This war is not for oil (as you hypocritical demonstrators think) but rather for prevention. Don't we all buy insurance, get vaccinated and have smoke detectors all to prevent something bad from happening?
JOSH GIEGEL
North Fayette
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Terrorists, too
The First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.."
My dictionary's definition of terrorism: "The systematic use of terror, esp. as a means of coercion."
I watched the peace march in Pittsburgh on Thursday. I had an unusual thought as I watched the proceedings. It was: "These people, too, are terrorists." That is, by the act of disrupting traffic, and, as I understand from the news reports, vandalizing automobiles, the act of assembly moved out of the domain of "peaceable" assembly and moved into the same world of motives that suicide bombers and other terrorists use.
This bothers me a lot. I am not in favor of the war, and furthermore I believe that opposition to the war is not at all inconsistent with patriotism. But I am distinctly opposed to people who have an important message to get across resorting to the same philosophical tactics that the followers of Osama bin Laden use. Certainly with less violence, and no loss of life. But, as George Bernard Shaw said in another context: "We've already established what you are. Now we're only haggling over the price."
If they believe these means are legitimate, where do we draw the line between what they did and what happened on 9/11? We should be opposed to the use of terrorism. To employ it demeans the democratic principles this country stands for.
I believe the First Amendment is plain: it says "peaceably assemble." It does not grant the right to disrupt the society in what are certainly non-peaceful ways, and I think such terrorist techniques only obscure and detract from the message they are trying to send.
JOSEPH M. NEWCOMER
Point Breeze
no suprise here
by pointy
Monday, Mar. 24, 2003 at 3:14 PM
there's not much you can do when the corporate media comes down on you. of course the people in the living rooms are going to be upset.
I don't see how we could have changed this though. the media was there and got a accurate picture of what transpired. They CHOOSE to portray the events as violent protests and blantetly lied about windows being broken and people "clashing" with police. The corporate media has a symbiotic relationship with the police and they WILL justify violent police behavior. The media depends on the police for access to information and interviews about stories. The police are the medias single most important source. No one should doubt they will repeat without much question the lies of the police.
Accurate picture
by George K.
Monday, Mar. 24, 2003 at 5:26 PM
dodgerambler@yahoo.com
No, the media got an accurate picture of what you people did. I also knew it would turn out this way from reading the posts on these boards for the week leading up to the start of the bombing. There were som many people flapping their gums about "diversity of tactics" that I could foresee the outcome of your so called friends in the "black bloc"'s tactics being lumped in with all of you.
Sorry to say, but if you think that un-permitted, disruptive, "peace" marches are going to further your cause in this city, you are wrong. You do not need a corporate media in Pittsburgh to know what the viewpoint of people will most likely be...that the marchers are out of line. And as for marching at night in downtown....no one here really cares, since Pittsburgh has not had a nightlife since the late '50s, so knock yourself out....uhhh, well, let a cop knock you out....hahahahahahahahhahaahha.
crap
by Evan N
Monday, Mar. 24, 2003 at 7:23 PM
this is why we have to watch every damn footstep we make. why give the media shit to talk about. if no one would have acted like a spoiled kid and thrown newspaper boxes, and no one responded to that motorist, it would be MUCH easier to respond to these people and even change their mind.
peacable crap is what i feel
by noah pression
Monday, Mar. 24, 2003 at 8:15 PM
i am responding to the guy who was so well versed in the constituion. the marchers were peacably assembled. it was not until one idiot decided he wanted to run over actvists that vandalism was resorted to. civil disobedience is most always peaceful. other than making symbols with dirt on already dirty PAT busses the marchers were peaceful. also the marchers almost never come dressed for battle. that is the bacon that does that. they come with their sticks and sheilds. we don't want to hurt them. we have the right to assemble. they take our rights away while they break the laws they are supposed to enforce.
about that first amendment . . .
by Andy Horbal
Monday, Mar. 24, 2003 at 11:51 PM
arh6@pitt.edu Oakland
I haven't posted this before because I thought it was too obvious . . .
Why, if people support the first amendment (see the way that it is cited in those letters to the editor), do they object when it is exercised? The police did nothing for the first three hours of the march; for the first three hours of the march, from any perspective, it was therefore legal. The tone of these letters suggest that we SHOULD NOT HAVE PROTESTED. Object to our point of view, fine. Object to our tactics, okay. Do not object to the protests themselves! If no one exercises their right to freedom of speech, how does anyone know whether or not they actually have it?
Re: "ask the people of Iraq after they're liberated . . . " --
Ask the people of Afghanistan. Ever wonder why you don't hear anything from anyone living outside of Kandahar or Kabul? It's very easy to "liberate" someone when you forget about them the moment you're done liberating.
media, accurate? hahahaha
by jwg
Tuesday, Mar. 25, 2003 at 1:24 AM
The media did not only not get an accurate account of events, they made things up. The medai is not twisting the truth anymore, they are wholly fabricating it.
Channel 11 said that the police mobilised after the marchers broke windows and spraypainted cars.
Find me one documented incident of that happening.
George
by Sam
Tuesday, Mar. 25, 2003 at 7:18 AM
Right George. Because you were there, right? So you know.
If it's on TV, it must be true!
Should be PG
by Sam
Tuesday, Mar. 25, 2003 at 9:07 AM
The "POG" in the title should be "PG".
Excuse me? Reality check.
by Colin
Tuesday, Mar. 25, 2003 at 4:08 PM
I love it when everyone refers to "what you people did" and the peace protesters as terrorists. Just say it. You're trying to discredit a whole entire movement, a whole entire line of thinking, a whole entire population.
I took part in the march as I just saw it happening, and wasn't aware of it being scheduled. When I saw it come by I just walked onto the sidewalk along it and smiled. I did not see one act of vandalism the whole entire time. The only ACT of vandalism was done then by a few individuals, a handful. It could be no more then six. Six of what? Three thousand?
The police were always around us the whole entire time. They could of moved in and arrested the six individuals if that was the case! Of course it isn't. This is pure and simple abuse!
I was in the crowd brutally arrested and thrown in jail, with the following charges pushed against me saying I "failed to disperse." The cops came down upon us in an alleyway, after forcing us into the alleyway, on both sides in a Roman Phalanx position with shields up. They said to disperse, we tried - they pushed us back, then within 10 seconds they just rioted on us. Mass arrests.
Please. You people have no clue on what happened. The media has a clue on what happened but that's not what reporting is about. Reporting isn't about truth. Reporting is about personal agenda's when a person owns it.
First off, I suggest you attempt understand the following concepts before responding.
1) Private ownership.
2) Law.
3) Journalism.
4) Democracy.
5) Freedom.
![[masthead]](/images/masthead_140.png)