Black Bloc don't much like the occupy movement do you? (Reply #64)

In the discussion thread: Woman arrested for marring anti-jihad NY subway ad [View all]

Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #58)

Wed Sep 26, 2012, 02:27 PM

azurnoir (45,850 posts)

64. Black Bloc don't much like the occupy movement do you?

and yes I agree watch the video especially the ad that proceeds it.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

121 replies	Author	Time	Post
Woman arrested for marring anti-jihad NY subway ad [View all]	closeupready	Sep 2012	OP
She sure seemed to hate that poster though...	socialindependocrat	Sep 2012	#1
I've often found that what "seems" to be, and what actually is, are quite often two wholly separate	LanternWaste	Sep 2012	#13
I am so ashamed...	socialindependocrat	Sep 2012	#15
Anything to say about the haters who are responsible for that poster at all?	sabrina 1	Sep 2012	#65
she hated on a hateful poster..	frylock	Sep 2012	#102
I think a reasonable argument can be made that if the action involves	no_hypocrisy	Sep 2012	#2
But if it's actually public property	DLnyc	Sep 2012	#42
Here's the rub: Somebody paid to put up that ad.	no_hypocrisy	Sep 2012	#67
no. here in LA occupiers were arrested for writing with chalk on the sidewalk. chalk!	robinlynne	Sep 2012	#115
Good on you, Mona!!!	Scuba	Sep 2012	#3
I would have probably done the same --	Hell Hath No Fury	Sep 2012	#7
That is vandalism and is illegal	ProgressiveProfessor	Sep 2012	#11
Sometimes vandalism is the correct response to hate speech --	Hell Hath No Fury	Sep 2012	#38
Correct response is not spray painting the speech of others including another person in the process	ProgressiveProfessor	Sep 2012	#48
I see this as an act of civil disobedience. Mona will pay her fine.	Comrade Grumpy	Sep 2012	#100
yep	frylock	Sep 2012	#105
I hope the fine is HUGE!	FrodosPet	Sep 2012	#119
whoop-dee-fucking-doo	frylock	Sep 2012	#104
This seems excessive. Defacing advertising in subway stations is common. Has been for decades.	SleeplessinSoCal	Sep 2012	#4
Still illegal vandalism	ProgressiveProfessor	Sep 2012	#12
This message was self-deleted by its author	bupkus	Sep 2012	#20
In their windows? Not by our standards no.	4th law of robotics	Sep 2012	#34
This message was self-deleted by its author	bupkus	Sep 2012	#37
You asked if spraypainting over "jew" signs in their own windows	4th law of robotics	Sep 2012	#40
This message was self-deleted by its author	bupkus	Sep 2012	#43
Right, which is why I clearly said by our standards	4th law of robotics	Sep 2012	#45
Surely you can make up better strawmen than that	ProgressiveProfessor	Sep 2012	#49
The 1st Amendment does not protect property destruction.	appal_jack	Sep 2012	#5
This message was self-deleted by its author	bupkus	Sep 2012	#6
Really?	Indydem	Sep 2012	#9
This message was self-deleted by its author	bupkus	Sep 2012	#16
What if the billboard called Israel savage and said Support Palestine?	oberliner	Sep 2012	#17
This message was self-deleted by its author	bupkus	Sep 2012	#25
Why not?	ProgressiveProfessor	Sep 2012	#51
Because there's a double standard in America, PP.	Scootaloo	Sep 2012	#54
You need to read up and get some facts...	ProgressiveProfessor	Sep 2012	#58
Black Bloc don't much like the occupy movement do you?	azurnoir	Sep 2012	#64
There are other places to watch the video...	ProgressiveProfessor	Sep 2012	#68
yep I'll bet on that	azurnoir	Sep 2012	#90
I know the facts, thanks	Scootaloo	Sep 2012	#76
lol	azurnoir	Sep 2012	#91
No, no, no...haven't we been lectured that companies, organizations, etc are not	24601	Sep 2012	#117
No it would not at least IMO	azurnoir	Sep 2012	#60
There is a difference	joeglow3	Sep 2012	#18
This message was self-deleted by its author	bupkus	Sep 2012	#23
Who gets to define "hate speech"?	joeglow3	Sep 2012	#50
NO PROGRESSIVES ARE DEFENDING THE 1st	Missycim	Sep 2012	#21
This message was self-deleted by its author	bupkus	Sep 2012	#24
who gets to define what hate speech is?	Missycim	Sep 2012	#32
This message was self-deleted by its author	bupkus	Sep 2012	#41
THat is your right	Missycim	Sep 2012	#53
But this is not abouut a movie it is about a known hate group that was allowed to put ba sign	azurnoir	Sep 2012	#57
I have no idea if they are a hate group or not	Missycim	Sep 2012	#62
The names of the associated groups are at the bottom of the sign	azurnoir	Sep 2012	#70
I agree they aren't a very good group lol	Missycim	Sep 2012	#77
So if an atheist were to put up a sign that said,	FrodosPet	Sep 2012	#120
Actually, hate speech is indeed free speech. Whether we agree with that speech is another	SlimJimmy	Sep 2012	#55
Hate speech most certainly is free speech. nt	Codeine	Sep 2012	#113
Well, they just silenced the spray painter. Since EVERYTHING is 'speech' now,	sabrina 1	Sep 2012	#81
why are you on the wrong side of every issue?	snooper2	Sep 2012	#26
LOL... destroying someone else's property is not covered under the 1st Amendment...	Comrade_McKenzie	Sep 2012	#29
Keith Haring was a vandal? Who knew?	closeupready	Sep 2012	#33
This message was self-deleted by its author	bupkus	Sep 2012	#44
Umbrage if free, take all you want, but the vandal's actions were illegal	ProgressiveProfessor	Sep 2012	#47
these people aren't progressives by any stretch	frylock	Sep 2012	#106
Who sold the ad space? The Transit Authority?	Kelvin Mace	Sep 2012	#8
MTA fought it in court and lost	ProgressiveProfessor	Sep 2012	#10
The Transit Authority was forced to place them there by a judge	ProudToBeBlueInRhody	Sep 2012	#35
:face plam:	Kelvin Mace	Sep 2012	#39
During this there was also an altercation with a supporter of the poster	ProgressiveProfessor	Sep 2012	#14
If the poster supporter started the altercation, self-defense	closeupready	Sep 2012	#19
I watched the video	ProgressiveProfessor	Sep 2012	#46
well let's take a gander at it but folks don't miss the anti-Obama ad that is attached to Calos's	azurnoir	Sep 2012	#59
I think they rotate like those here at DU	ProgressiveProfessor	Sep 2012	#71
I watched the video, and being 100% honest,	closeupready	Sep 2012	#61
Do you think that she spay painted the counter protestor as well?	ProgressiveProfessor	Sep 2012	#69
Assault and battery, no.	closeupready	Sep 2012	#72
I do not agree with the part about a perp not being responsible for their actions if warning	ProgressiveProfessor	Sep 2012	#79
Culpability is shared.	closeupready	Sep 2012	#83
Not at all, I question the vandal's motives because of the set up with the media	ProgressiveProfessor	Sep 2012	#86
If I stare at you, that is not A&B. If I touch your shoulder in	closeupready	Sep 2012	#96
Prosecutors waste all sorts of time and public funds on bogus prosecutions	ProgressiveProfessor	Sep 2012	#98
I think that Gellers employee (according to Miller)	azurnoir	Sep 2012	#73
I commented on it earlier...though it may have been elsewhere now that I think about it	ProgressiveProfessor	Sep 2012	#78
She's an activist and a very dedicated one	starroute	Sep 2012	#22
Fascinating. I wonder even if she	closeupready	Sep 2012	#28
Good. That's vandalism. nt	Comrade_McKenzie	Sep 2012	#27
This message was self-deleted by its author	bupkus	Sep 2012	#30
Good God, this place is silly. It was an act of civil disobedience.	Comrade Grumpy	Sep 2012	#101
It will most likely include restitution to the very people she was hating on.	ProgressiveProfessor	Sep 2012	#108
Yeah, 50 cents to replace that poster is gonna make Pam Geller's day.	Comrade Grumpy	Sep 2012	#110
It would, even if it is just symbolic. I really see both sides as drama queens at this point	ProgressiveProfessor	Sep 2012	#114
I doubt it	4th law of robotics	Sep 2012	#31
I support Eltahawy's act of Civil Disobedience.	bluedigger	Sep 2012	#36
Including what looks like assaulting a counter protestor with paint?	ProgressiveProfessor	Sep 2012	#52
That isn't what I see.	bluedigger	Sep 2012	#74
Spray painting people, even if they get in your way while you are doing something illegal, is also	ProgressiveProfessor	Sep 2012	#80
Then she must be satisfied with the actions taken.	bluedigger	Sep 2012	#109
But more dramatic for both sides if there is a criminal complaint	ProgressiveProfessor	Sep 2012	#112
I might have done it too	mitchtv	Sep 2012	#63
I thought the OP read she was marrying the ad	darkangel218	Sep 2012	#56
As long as the ad consents, what's the problem?	closeupready	Sep 2012	#66
Aparently the ad didnt consent so she's in jail now	darkangel218	Sep 2012	#75
I knew I wasn't the only one n/t	Duer 157099	Sep 2012	#85
Brava Mona!	countryjake	Sep 2012	#82
I'm wondering now if the "fighting words" doctrine	closeupready	Sep 2012	#84
Probably not, but it doesn't matter, anyway...	countryjake	Sep 2012	#87
I am sure she know how to throw a media event...	ProgressiveProfessor	Sep 2012	#88
Whatever it takes to expose the Islamophobia!	countryjake	Sep 2012	#93
Making it a media event the way she did, leads me question to her motives	ProgressiveProfessor	Sep 2012	#95
"the vandal" ?????????	countryjake	Sep 2012	#97
Yes...what was done was vandalism	ProgressiveProfessor	Sep 2012	#99
Yes, it was vandalism. Much more importantly, it was an act of civil disobediance.	Comrade Grumpy	Sep 2012	#103
Only spots I know of who slime Mona with nasty terms like...	countryjake	Sep 2012	#107
if someone was defacing hateful anti-Semitic ads posted in nyc subway stations - I wonder how many	Douglas Carpenter	Sep 2012	#89
I wonder how many DU'ers would be telling others to "Have a nice shower."	Behind the Aegis	Sep 2012	#92
War doesn't have rules	Shitty Mitty	Sep 2012	#111
If she created the work she defaced it would be protected performance art	onenote	Sep 2012	#94
video here	riverwalker	Sep 2012	#116
Why resort to vandalism? There are so many legal ways to protest the ads.	Nye Bevan	Sep 2012	#118
It was set up as a media event	ProgressiveProfessor	Sep 2012	#121

Edit History

Please login to view edit histories.