Tom, The employment issue might be relevant. You could wear a hat, sunglasses, and a hospital mask as a disguise, but the goggles are teargas protection, maybe the bandanna as well. I was in Chicago for the Democratic National Convention of '68. I think these people wanted to recreate that atmosphere this year. I praise the Chicago Police Department for being cool despite the taunting and attempts to provoke them for media coverage. This was a media event. The Vietnam War protests were a different thing altogether. Regards, Bob S.
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 1:28 PM, Tom C <caka...@gmail.com> wrote: >> From: Bob Sullivan <rf.sulli...@gmail.com> >> >> I found some of the NATO meeting protesters despicable. >> Why come to a protest wearing goggles and a bandanna over your face, >> and another over your hair? >> Only reason I can imagine is that you intend to damage property, >> and you want to keep your identity a secret. >> That's hardly the peaceful expression of dissent and disagreement. >> Regards, Bob S. >> >> On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 11:08 AM, Tom C <caka...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> The comment was Dan Matyola's, not Steve's. Dan is an ex fighter pilot, so >>>> he has license to wing it once in awhile. His remark was > perhaps a bit >>>> rash but ?less incendiary than many of the signs held by the protesters >>>> (who were protesting a NATO meeting, chaired > by Obama, where the topic >>>> of discussion was Afghanistan withdrawal). >>>> Paul >>> >>> Yes but ostensibly, those in the country's armed forces serve and >>> and/or fight to protect individuals' freedoms and, among other things, >>> the right to dissent and disagree. I always note a certain irony then, >>> when exercising those rights is looked upon with disdain by those who >>> work to secure them.. What good is a right if one is not free to >>> exercise it? >>> >>> I'm certainly not picking on Dan or anyone else. Just pointing this out. >>> >>> Tom C. > > I'm not defending them, their beliefs or their actions, only making > the point that that they have the right to such. Wearing goggles and a > bandanna is not in itself a crime. Even acting like a total obnoxious > idiot is not a crime necessarily. Damaging property would be. > > I can think of any number of reasons a person may wish to remain > anonymous. First off, what if my employer was the type that would take > prejudicial action against me simply because I held a different view > than his? I frequently refrain from expressing my beliefs or > viewpoints at work for precisely that reason. Because you never know. > > Pentax sucks. ;-) > > Tom C. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
