Weird, dumbass and hypocritical political statements...

[sandinista]

going to the government and making a request to "protest" getting access to the proper "protest area". Filling out the appropriate forms etc. Basically informing the city when and where the "protest" will take place and getting the proper permission. I have been to "protests" like that many times, even had police escorts at a few. Other protests I've been to, not state sanctioned, are more often than not interupted by pigs with a request to leave the area, and arrest if the area is not left.

[Coito ergo sum]

going to the government and making a request to "protest" getting access to the proper "protest area". Filling out the appropriate forms etc. Basically informing the city when and where the "protest" will take place and getting the proper permission.

Every city in the world has time, place and manner restrictions like that. As long as the government is content-neutral when it comes to issuing permits for large demonstrations, then there isn't a problem. It's like how small groups of people can use a public park for picnics without a permit, but if you want a gathering of like 100 people or more, then you have to get a permit because there are safety, security and clean-up issues, and there may be conflicts between groups (such as when one group having a march spawns groups that oppose those groups to come out at the same time).

I have been to "protests" like that many times, even had police escorts at a few. Other protests I've been to, not state sanctioned, are more often than not interupted by pigs with a request to leave the area, and arrest if the area is not left.

I'm sure that's happened. However, I've seen many, many protests where people can say lots of inflammatory things very loudly, including anti-government and anti-police stuff, and they are allowed to continue unmolested.

[sandinista]

I guess you don't see the irony in asking permission from the government to protest against the government. I understand your point with large gatherings and such, I'm just saying that sending riot cops out to stop people from protesting, or setting up "free speech zones" and arresting people en mass for protesting basically makes it illegal, unless it's state sanctioned.

[Robert_S]

Coito: I know leftists and I know rightists. My theory is that the liberals and socialists are generally more prone to violent language because mostly they do not own guns. That puts some distance between words and actions. Right wingers on the other hand, do own guns. They join militias. They kill people. So you are less likely to see depictions of violence at their demonstrations.

Now, about the '60s.

[sandinista]

found this pretty funny, in an ironic way:

“Canada condemns the decision of the Iranian authorities to use violence and force against their own people. ..... The government’s reaction has been to silence the voices of its own people through brutality. ..... The Iranian people deserve to have their voices heard, without fear of intimidation or violence. Canada condemns the use of force to stifle dissent ..... The government of Canada continues to support freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law in Iran.”

- Conservative Foreign Affairs Minister, Lawrence Cannon, June 2009