The War Stops Here

Navigation

User login

Online users

JstPlnOnry
Ehver Green
Berd
emmettoconnell
einmaleins
LongRider
Locutus
FRESH
jusbytheclown
Guglielmo

Support OlyBlog

OlyBlog is run by volunteers who care about Olympia. If you like what we're doing, make a donation:

OlyBlog is powered by:

Who's new

LongRider
non illegitimi ...
acreatureapart
eristalis
Hillguy

The War Stops Here

Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Sun, 11/11/2007 - 4:39pm.

I wouldn't be surprised to learn that most soldiers oppose what is happening in Iraq. There are so many horror stories coming out of there.

How can we make it so the Olympia Police Department will stop preventing the prevention of this war?

We need to get the cops on our side somehow. Or we need such an overwhelming show of support in the street that the cops do not have the means of exercising authority over our actions to stop the war.

Let's stop the war and prevent further harm to our soldiers, our military, our nation, the nation of Iraq, and the world...

link to set

Robert Whitlock's blog
Login or register to post comments

I have to say

Submitted by vincent_vega on Wed, 12/05/2007 - 2:48pm.

that I believe you are wrong on that point. I just returned from a very nice vacation that happened to incorporate many visits to friends involved in the military, near military bases, in a Democrat state. This said, I did a little informal poll as to what the enlisted people thought about the war, many of whom are slated to return to either Iraq or Afghanistan. Overwhelming, and I mean overwhelming, response was that they were onside with the war. They do not experience protests about their equipment coming and going from the port, the people are very supportive of the troops, and I dont mean by protesting to "support" them. I came back to Olympia ashamed of what is going on here and what you are orchestrating. You leave a black mark on our city.

Can you please tell me

Submitted by security_six on Wed, 12/05/2007 - 3:03pm.

What you mean by "Get the Olympia Police Department on our side"?

I don't think they are taking any "sides" but are abiding by rules laid in place regarding what consitutes a peaceful protest, and what levels of force to use on non compliant people. I made a blog entry on use of force. Right now I can't get an image up of the page I referenced, but I gave directions on where to look. While directed at security guards, this is a fine example of what constitutes acceptable force.

You have to keep in mind any actions the OPD take are generally supported by their lawyers, the city manager and the mayor's office.

I don't think they would interfere with peaceful protests that do not block the lawful flow of traffic nor harass or intimidate others. I expect that they would have the same reaction for a pro war gathering that went in the same direction as the recent port protests.

To change the response of the police to these "peaceful" protests (I have already established what I thought of them, and will not go into it again) one must change the way the City allows the police to respond, and how the city views these forms of protests.

Edit, added last paragraph by way of clarification

Disagreement

Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Wed, 12/05/2007 - 8:10pm.

I just want to make it clear that I disagree with what Vincent Vega has to say (above). I am curious about whether or not, in your little informal poll, you queried anyone who was opposed to the war - AND whether or not you intentionally polled only those who were "overwhelmingly" "onside" with the war.

I'm just slightly skeptical. That's all.

Secondly, I am flattered by your claim that I "orchestrated" "what is going on here" - but honestly and in the interests of full disclosure, I did nothing of the sort. I simply participated in a democratic process, the end result of which was what I assume you were referring to when you wrote "what is going on here".

I'll leave the black mark alone for now, although I appreciate your sentiments. And I am sorry that you feel that way.

Get the Police on the Side of Peace

Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Wed, 12/05/2007 - 3:02pm.

What I meant was that I believe it is possible to encourage the police to use their enforcement potential against the making of aggressive military campaigns.

If the war is illegal (as I firmly believe that it is - en re: the alleged deliberate falsification of "evidence" that was then used to justify invasion by President Bush et al.,) then the use of our municipal port to enable said military action also contravenes relevant legal statutes.

By enforcing against the military use of our municipal port, to enable an illegal (aggressive) military action, the Police would be upholding the laws of the land.

This is an interesting can of worms

Submitted by security_six on Wed, 12/05/2007 - 3:10pm.

First you have to get the local governments to find this war is illegal. Then you have to consider some of the legal principle that came out of the War Between the States. It is now held that the States do not have the right to wage war upon the United States. Personally I disagree with this in principle.

First, there has to be a ruling that this war is "illegal" If this came down from a high court, I would agree that you have a point.

Right now, it is legal to ship military equipment through the port. The Federal Government has the right to ship equipment on the water.

I see you saying the Police should use violence, or the threat thereof to block the port from being used to handle military cargo. Would you support the Governor calling out the National Guard for this? Mobilizing the unorganized miliita (citizens between 18-45 years old) Would you support individual citizens taking up arms and blocking these shipments? The Federal government would use any force needed to handle these shipments, and would meet force with force. If you are asking the police to block these shipments, you are asking for an armed conflict. Is that what you want?

Think about this one. If the police block these shipments, and the Feds use troops to force them through, are you expecting the police to fight back? Or just to fall back? At which point using them is meaningless.

I support the shipment of military cargo through the Port as you know. The war will not be ended by blocking shipments through Olympia, nor will it be ended by having the Police fight for you.

It's really Simple (and complicated)

Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Wed, 12/05/2007 - 3:32pm.

All I am saying, without all of the "What if" mumbo-jumbo, is that I would rather have the Police on my side, helping to oppose the shipments (v. the current situation.)

The case that the Bush Administration made false claims about the threat from Iraq in order to justify invasion are very strong. Just because this case hasn't been tried in a court doesn't mean that it isn't appropriate for well-meaning citizens to act on these suspicions. Especially if you look at the reasons that this case hasn't been tried in court.

I wish that a Federal Court would hear a case in regard to the various alleged improprieties of the Bush Administration. But at the same time, we have to take into consideration all the reasons that such a case hasn't materialized (at least to my knowledge.) I think first and foremost among these reasons is that such a case might be considered political (which it is not). But the claim that it might be motivated by politics would enable a court to avoid hearing it. Also, look at who has the legal resources in this country and who doesn't. The people who are suffering the most from this war do happen to be the people who have comparatively less access to legal recourse. etc.

[edit: more on this here]

Okay

Submitted by security_six on Wed, 12/05/2007 - 3:37pm.

I misunderstood some of what you were saying. When you said you wanted to police to aid in stopping this, I was expecting something else.

At any rate, I truly believe the police have no interest in this one way or another, except in their official capacity to keep the (local) public order. I believe you would have the same level of response for any similar protest, regardless of the issue. Block streets, move dumpsters around, don't respond to dispersal orders, get pepper sprayed. This is not political, just policy.

Block streets, move dumpsters, don't disperse....

Submitted by OlyDowntowner on Thu, 12/06/2007 - 9:01am.

Funny, at least four Olympian employees who were on the scene reporting and photographing the protests were pepper sprayed. What, exactly, did they do to deserve getting sprayed? Did they block the streets, move dumpsters around, or fail to respond to dispersal order to get pepper sprayed? Maybe you need to add "do your job" to your list of actions which can result in getting assaulted by OPD.

They were

Submitted by security_six on Thu, 12/06/2007 - 10:19am.

in the line of fire, and knew that possibility. I thought about going down and watching, but decided I did not want to get caught in any crossfire. I got a whiff of pepper spray in a Seattle event just as an observer and do not wish to repeat that.

So maybe you need to add

Submitted by OlyDowntowner on Thu, 12/06/2007 - 11:54am.

So maybe you need to add "observing" to your list of offenses which justifiably result in being pepper sprayed.

There Are More

Submitted by Ehver Green on Thu, 12/06/2007 - 11:59am.

Should all of them be detailed or are you simply making points to be contentious? We get the point. I don't recall S6 saying his list was comprehensive in any way.

Well, since you asked

Submitted by OlyDowntowner on Thu, 12/06/2007 - 8:34pm.

SS was implying a cause and effect relationship between violent/criminal behavior, and police retaliation. But there were a number of people who were beaten and sprayed who were not acting violently, and many (including but not limited to Olympian employees) were not even breaking laws. His list certainly was not comprehensive; in fact, it was so incomplete that it was misleading, which I'm sure was his intention.

Mind reader huh?

Submitted by security_six on Thu, 12/06/2007 - 8:57pm.

I had no idea I would set off this level of discussion, especially as I am trying extra hard to be extra nice...

No I was not trying to be misleading. Of course I doubt you will accept that as it does not seem to fit with the point you are trying to make. That's fine, you are entitled to your opinion.

What gets me is how everyone is upset for the Olympian employees... except the Olympian and those employees.

Do you think if there was a chance at a righteous lawsuit, they would pass it up? "Innocent Reporter Assaulted While Merely Doing Job!" If the O isn't complaining, neither should anyone else. They have the right to complain about it.

Can you please tell me what else I should have said in order to satisfy you?

"They have the right to complain about it"

Submitted by OlyDowntowner on Fri, 12/07/2007 - 3:15pm.

Sure they do. And lose their jobs.

Damn...

Submitted by security_six on Sat, 12/08/2007 - 10:28pm.

Why can't people just drop this? So some guys from the O may have gotten pepper sprayed. The version I read in the paper (which I would accept as authoritative) and all the blabbing about it here are two different things. To hear some speak, I would think they got sprayed and not a reporter.

Only in Olympia will someone not accept the word of an organization who's employees got caught in the crossfire of a protest, and suggest a deeper, darker meaning.

Do you really think The O is oppressing their reporters? What gives with this? This is actually pathetic. Let them complain if there are complaints to be made.

An Olympian reporter and a photographer

Submitted by Guglielmo on Sun, 12/09/2007 - 9:33am.

got sprayed because they were standing in the middle of a bunch of people who got sprayed. I was there. Because they were not specifically targeted and they knew the risks associated with mingling with peaceful protesters near Olympia cops, they probably don't think they have grounds to complain. Some of the people who got sprayed, however, should f*ing sue. The People won a suit in Seattle (WTO) recently, and they shoud win here too. A police policy manual doesn't trump the constitution.

No shame here

Submitted by Guglielmo on Wed, 12/05/2007 - 3:47pm.

Keep up the good work Rob. Dissent is as American as it gets.

In Service of the Vision of a Better World

Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Wed, 12/05/2007 - 4:50pm.

I believe that the vision of a better world; and the prospect of a better, healthier, more stable, more secure future world; is served through the broad delegitimization of violence in general.

Military Polls

Submitted by Phil Owen on Wed, 12/05/2007 - 7:41pm.

We've had conversations on the blog before about the stance of people in the Armed Forces regarding the Iraq War. There are published, professional polls out there showing that the military closely resembles the general population in regard to opinions on Iraq. I posted links long ago, don't feel like digging it up again. Anyone want to dig up the numbers?

The Canaanite's Call

OlyBlog.net

OlyBlog is devoted to citizen journalism, including hyperlocal news and discussion specifically about Olympia, Washington. If you care about this community and are tired of corporate media, then this is the place for you.

If you'd like to contribute, please register for an account. Here is a list of local news beats that need to be covered. You can post your news as a personal blog entry, and it will be reviewed (and possibly edited) for promotion to the front page. Once you've established a record of responsible blogging, you can become an autonomous user. You can also send news via email. All members of OlyBlog agree to abide by our comment and fair use policies. If you are frustrated about something said in a comment thread, go here.

Now playing at: