Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 08:32 PM Jan 2012

Why do people defend the actions of infiltrators?


Okay, so two things I learned this week:

1. People who take stuff they don't own and burn it are malevolent infiltrators and provacateurs.

2. Taking stuff and burning it is perfectly fine because:
(a) it is protected by the First Amenment, and/or
(b) other people have done bad things.

So, if it was okay to take a flag from City Hall and burn it, why blame provocateurs?

Is the claim here "people are infiltrating OWS and doing stuff we support"?
35 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Why do people defend the actions of infiltrators? (Original Post) jberryhill Jan 2012 OP
ooh, you're going to get it! dionysus Jan 2012 #1
Sounds personal. Union Scribe Jan 2012 #3
sounds like an accurate observation... dionysus Jan 2012 #11
Move over... Wait Wut Jan 2012 #4
I don't know if the people who did it are anti-OWS Union Scribe Jan 2012 #2
Very good. SammyWinstonJack Jan 2012 #6
I'm just trying to follow the argument jberryhill Jan 2012 #7
There's no disconnect. a simple pattern Jan 2012 #17
I don't care about symbols jberryhill Jan 2012 #18
Cross-burning idiots love them some flag. a simple pattern Feb 2012 #22
I don't have a "point" jberryhill Feb 2012 #23
Agreed. a simple pattern Feb 2012 #31
The cops did not stand there and watch pintobean Feb 2012 #32
So the people who wanted to disperse were kettled and arrested, a simple pattern Feb 2012 #34
Asked to leave? pintobean Feb 2012 #35
i don't think it will end the movement, but that particular event won't win too many folks over. dionysus Jan 2012 #9
I see this being said a lot... renie408 Jan 2012 #10
it's the viewpoint some have as OWS being the latest proxy against obama. dionysus Jan 2012 #20
That viewpoint is not mine jberryhill Feb 2012 #24
+1000 2pooped2pop Jan 2012 #12
You'll find very few 'anti-OWS' people here. randome Jan 2012 #19
Oh yeah, you got that one right! Rex Feb 2012 #30
Yeah, I got that, too, but I am already getting burned alive because I think you shouldn't renie408 Jan 2012 #5
While I fully, and without question, support OWS, ScreamingMeemie Jan 2012 #8
My point exactly. n/t renie408 Jan 2012 #13
Perfectly worded. Texasgal Jan 2012 #16
You conveniently left out #3 whatchamacallit Jan 2012 #14
It's a combination of the Soddi defense and the 'He needed killin' defense.... msanthrope Jan 2012 #15
People are always convinced that their "side" is so righteous and correct that anyone on it who does apocalypsehow Jan 2012 #21
If God isn't real, then how did Jesus come back from the dead? sudopod Feb 2012 #25
Lol jberryhill Feb 2012 #27
I have consistently denied there is evidence that they are infiltrators. joshcryer Feb 2012 #26
why do people defend the actions of bad cops? uncle ray Feb 2012 #28
Aren't provocateurs bad cops? jberryhill Feb 2012 #29
You forgot 'if it's public property an I pay taxes, how can it be stealing?'...nt SidDithers Feb 2012 #33

dionysus

(26,467 posts)
1. ooh, you're going to get it!
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 08:33 PM
Jan 2012

time to



it's funny, isn't it? some of the folks who always accuse people of "blindly cheerleading" something... seem to be blindly cheerleading something...

Union Scribe

(7,099 posts)
2. I don't know if the people who did it are anti-OWS
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 08:35 PM
Jan 2012

but the people who are riding it to the funeral they've planned for the movement are. That's my claim.

 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
7. I'm just trying to follow the argument
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 08:40 PM
Jan 2012

And maybe I'm conflating things, but there seems to be a logical disconnect.

I'm not asking if the people who did it were "anti-OWS". It just seems that if it was a defensible and legitimate thing to do, then why blame it on some "anti-OWS" infiltrators.

 

a simple pattern

(608 posts)
17. There's no disconnect.
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 09:28 PM
Jan 2012

It can be both defensible and legitimate, and be a stunt likely to be pulled by infiltrators because it does not play well in Peoria.

(and by "in Peoria" I mean "with idiots who care more about the destruction of a symbol than about the destruction of the thing symbolized.&quot

 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
23. I don't have a "point"
Wed Feb 1, 2012, 02:10 AM
Feb 2012

I come here to exchange ideas. Some of them are pointless.

The First Amendment allows you to burn a flag, burn a cross, make and buy pornography, wear a Nazi uniform, cuss, and engage in all sorts of things that are guaranteed to piss people off.

That one can do these things is not, by itself, a reason to do them.

 

a simple pattern

(608 posts)
31. Agreed.
Wed Feb 1, 2012, 12:40 PM
Feb 2012

I don't think these things are all equivalent, though. Burning a flag can have different meanings; burning a cross means one thing only. Nobody lights up one of those things to protest the sorry state of religion these days.

I am still not convinced that the Occupiers burned the flag. There was a great big show of kettling and mass arrests, but the cops stand there and watch these guys and don't arrest them? Very suspicious.

 

pintobean

(18,101 posts)
32. The cops did not stand there and watch
Wed Feb 1, 2012, 12:46 PM
Feb 2012

They came and told everyone to leave and everyone left. That was well into the event. I don't know why people keep making this claim.

&feature=player_embedded
 

a simple pattern

(608 posts)
34. So the people who wanted to disperse were kettled and arrested,
Wed Feb 1, 2012, 01:01 PM
Feb 2012

then the people who had just vandalized City Hall were asked to leave.

Makes sense to me.

renie408

(9,854 posts)
10. I see this being said a lot...
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 08:44 PM
Jan 2012

Why would this past weekend kill the movement? I mean, even if it turned out that it really was OWS people who stole the flag and burned it, that wouldn't change the fact that I support the movement. It just makes me think that a few people got carried away and did something they shouldn't have. There are thousands and thousands of people involved in this protest. Even if you take all of the Oakland Occupy movement, it is just a small part of the whole.

And why would anybody HERE want to end OWS? I am not trying to be naive, I just don't get that whole sentiment. I just don't think people should steal, trespass or vandalize to make a point.

dionysus

(26,467 posts)
20. it's the viewpoint some have as OWS being the latest proxy against obama.
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 09:46 PM
Jan 2012

it's framed somehow as obama vs OWS, even though it isn't.

so it somehow twists into DU inside baseball of obama supoporters must be against OWS and vice versa...

 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
24. That viewpoint is not mine
Wed Feb 1, 2012, 02:17 AM
Feb 2012

I try not to pigeonhole people.

Some people approach a discussion for the purpose of simply categorizing others as some "type" of person. I find very few people to be a "type", and most folks tend to be individuals with all sorts of mixes of experiences, opinions, and points of view.

The problem with lumping everyone else in with some category or another is really not useful. It is a way of avoiding engagement rather than engaging them - of ending conversations instead of finding any benefit to them.

 

2pooped2pop

(5,420 posts)
12. +1000
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 08:44 PM
Jan 2012

I don't think we need to continue to explain the existance of provacatuers to the naysayers any longer. They either understand about them and are just trying to stir shit up, or they are dumber than shit themselves. Provacatuers are not a new thing. We know the intentions of Occupy and we know it is an advantage to those who would like to see Occupy fail, to make it appear violent.

Tough fucking shit to any who are anti Occupy. I consider them anti-American.

Not you Union, but those who look for anythig shitty to post about it. I'm sure they will start correcting the grammar of the Occupiers soon too. Nit picky little brats.

For me, Occupy will have to burn down the whole damned city to make me take a stand against them. They are standing against those who have more or less burnt down this whole damned country. They get a shit load of leeway from me.
(not that I want to see any shit, just that shit won't shoo me away)

So if Occupiers burned the flag, so fucking what? Once Palin wrapped herself in one, it needed a good cleaning by fire.

If provacatuers burned the flag, status quo.

 

randome

(34,845 posts)
19. You'll find very few 'anti-OWS' people here.
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 09:37 PM
Jan 2012

But there are quite a few 'anti-stupid-stunt' people.

Stupid stunts like bragging to the Oakland police that they going to take over a building.

Way to fight the Establishment!

renie408

(9,854 posts)
5. Yeah, I got that, too, but I am already getting burned alive because I think you shouldn't
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 08:36 PM
Jan 2012

steal and vandalize stuff. I wasn't about to point out that some people are covering both sides of the argument.

ScreamingMeemie

(68,918 posts)
8. While I fully, and without question, support OWS,
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 08:41 PM
Jan 2012

I do not support the desecration, or stealing of, private property or monuments of public pride in the name of the movement. We recently visited Dallas as a side trip to dropping my dad off at the airport. It brought tears to my eyes to see writing (what appears to be permanent because I could not wipe or wash it off) on the base of the JFK Memorial. That said, I believe it is a small number of people and not the movement on a whole.

whatchamacallit

(15,558 posts)
14. You conveniently left out #3
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 08:46 PM
Jan 2012

People who don't claim it was infiltrators and don't care that a flag was burned either way. It's a tempest in a tea pot. Let's keep our eyes on the prize and get back to business.

 

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)
15. It's a combination of the Soddi defense and the 'He needed killin' defense....
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 08:53 PM
Jan 2012

Some other dude did it, but it needed to be done.....

apocalypsehow

(12,751 posts)
21. People are always convinced that their "side" is so righteous and correct that anyone on it who does
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 09:51 PM
Jan 2012

something wrong, or criminal, or just plain stupid must be an "provocateur" or "infiltrator." During the French Revolution, they kept the guillotines humming on just such suppositions, and with just as flimsy or non-existent of evidence as is bouncing around DU now about some kind of "cointelpro" being behind anything someone associated with OWS might be doing that looks bad, like burning American flags.

joshcryer

(62,265 posts)
26. I have consistently denied there is evidence that they are infiltrators.
Wed Feb 1, 2012, 03:06 AM
Feb 2012

And if they are infiltrators, because I defend their protected speech, I'm not showing any sort of double standard.

uncle ray

(3,153 posts)
28. why do people defend the actions of bad cops?
Wed Feb 1, 2012, 03:42 AM
Feb 2012

i call for the same punishment of the flag burners as the pepper-spray cop.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why do people defend the ...