Anti-war, pro-Marine confrontation begins early in Berkeley

Anti-war, pro-Marine confrontation begins early in Berkeley

origin.mercurynews.com

A pre-dawn confrontation broke out this morning in Berkeley between peace activists and pro military groups, more than 12 hours before the City Council considers to rescind its statement telling the U.S. Marines they're unwelcome in this left-leaning town.

Police were forced to form a line between the two groups to keep them apart shortly after 6 a.m. at the park across Martin Luther King Jr. Way from old City Hall, where the City Council meets.

(visit the link for the full news article)

These kinds of protests are not uncommon, and happen on a regular basis. I thought it would be good to shed some light on this story as a lot of people feel that no one is really going out and doing anything.

I receive news from World Can't Wait, which focuses a lot on the main issues and includes lots of protests like this. But I don't see very many threads here that cover these events. Lots of waterboarding demonstrations have set light on the issue, as well as other forms of protest.

I can only see the amount of protesters rising and to new extremes if something major does happen and is the fault mainly of those at the top.

origin.mercurynews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 12/2/2008 by Nyorai]

From Berkeley, it turns out the City Council has decided to allow the Marines to continue recruiting and not be expelled from the city. Yet the City Council voted overwhelmingly to allow some key points to continue, including allowing Code Pink to protest once a week and with a sound permit:

At the same time, the council let stand four other items it passed at its previous meeting, including one encouraging "all people to avoid cooperation with the Marine Corps recruiting station," another asking the city attorney to investigate whether the recruiting station is breaking the city's law against discrimination based on sexual orientation...

It has been quite a conflict in Berkeley with many coming in from out of state to let their opinion be heard.

Either they'll annoy the marines into leaving, it will lead to another confrontation, or the marine recruits will withstand.

[edit on 13/2/2008 by Nyorai]

Personally I think the Marines and the Feds should pull out...and leave Berkeley to defend for itself when the next terrorist attack occurs in their city.....I'm from California and these guys are weird! Berkeley city council has more to worry about than this....like how about helping all the homeless people in the Bay area? Oh I forgot....many of their homeless are vet's who defended them!

reply to post by realmatrix


May I ask when was the last terrorist attack on Berkley? I am all for your idea...have the Marines pull out and let Berkley fend for itself. If history is our guide, I am sure they will fend off the "Terrorist" quite well.

Originally posted by MrWendal
reply to post by realmatrix

 

May I ask when was the last terrorist attack on Berkley? I am all for your idea...have the Marines pull out and let Berkley fend for itself. If history is our guide, I am sure they will fend off the "Terrorist" quite well. [/quote

I don't believe there was ever an attack on Berkeley directly....which gives me all the more confidence that they could indeed handle the situation without our Marines or the Feds...Just get cheech and chong!

[edit on 13-2-2008 by realmatrix]

reply to post by MrWendal



I am very interested also to know when was the last one in that city.

I have nothing against the Military recruiting, is up to the people to decided if they want to join or not so this is a big thing for nothing.

But been at state level it shows that individual state still have some pull.

reply to post by marg6043


I didn't know the City Council could do this. I thought it had to be under a law not necessarily by popular decision.

Those in power were cutting funding to Berkeley because of the stance it took; so it's no wonder they backed down. Although I don't see how kicking out recruiters will leave it greatly vulnerable to attacks.

Interesting to see how the power of the federal pursue can influence the states to take the federal stance.

No wonder our republic is almost none existence because is financially Dependant on the federal budget.

Originally posted by marg6043
Interesting to see how the power of the federal pursue can influence the states to take the federal stance.

No wonder our republic is almost none existence because is financially Dependant on the federal budget.

Ok Marge I think we are on the same page....Correct me if I am wrong.
Constitutionally it is the responsibilty of the Feds to protect us from " all threats both foreign and domestic."

Needless to say to protect US...being the citizens of this country, Berkeley included, the military must be manned with volunteers....at least at this point they are volunteers.

So what I'm saying is that, Berkeley, if they want to throw out the Marines for recruiting, which is their right, should also be prepared to defend themselves, when and if there is an attack which may require military and or federal assistance! Am I wrong on this point? Or should they have it both ways?

Bottom line is that the military is all volunteer, so nobody is being forced to join!


[edit on 13-2-2008 by realmatrix]

reply to post by marg6043


Ah yes, the chains of the shiny dime. Isn't that what it always comes down to? Being run by funding, the economy? And one's apathy I must say.

Those in power must sacrifice. But this sacrifice cannot be minor, for a minor sacrifice means minor change. We need complete sacrifice for the better.

reply to post by realmatrix


Yes, that is why I have not problem with military recruiting, after all I have been a military brad and wife all my life.

But is interesting to think that citizens will no be able to defend their communities or their cities by themselves if the need arises.

I personally will take arms against anything foreign or domestic that will go against my constitutional rights and I am sure that is many that will do the same.

But to think that because a group of people in a city denied access to a recruiting group will be left to defend themselves that is un American.

But you can always go to another city to join the volunteer arm services of your choice, right?

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by realmatrix

 

Yes, that is why I have not problem with military recruiting, after all I have been a military brad and wife all my life.

But is interesting to think that citizens will no be able to defend their communities or their cities by themselves if the need arises.

I personally will take arms against anything foreign or domestic that will go against my constitutional rights and I am sure that is many that will do the same.

But to think that because a group of people in a city denied access to a recruiting group will be left to defend themselves that is un American.

But you can always go to another city to join the volunteer arm services of your choice, right?

Indeed....as I said earlier...I think we are both on the same page, we both want the citizens of the U.S protected!

Nyorai

That is how our federal government can control the individual states and stop them from exercising the power of independent government.

That is why I said that the Republic is a dying breed.

Time for the rebuttal.

-The city council called the Marines “unwelcome intruders,” and called for them to leave town.

Funny, didn't they approve and grant permission for them to set up the recruiting office in the first place?

-It gave Code Pink a special parking place directly in front of their office to facilitate its protests against the Marines.

Funny, do they do that at abortion clinics?

-Mayor Tom Bates, who says that the City Council didn't mean to offend the Marines (oh please!!!) has joined Code Pink in their pickets in front of the Marine Recruiting Center

Hmm, wonder when he is up for reelection?

-Code Pink has helped fund terrorist families in Iraq with a $600,000 gift.

So make sure you point out your unpatriotic support of that organization.

reply to post by COOL HAND


Interesting taking into consideration that is election year and the war in Iraq is so unpopular perhaps is nothing than a political move to get the citizens votes.

But as everything it will backfire.

reply to post by marg6043


The mayor also offered to broker the deal where the Marines would be let out of their lease.

All it costs them is a loss of their First Amendment rights. Thankfully the Marines are staying put.

If the people of Berkley are going to impede federal business, what gives them the right to expect federal funding?
Please don't tell me it is because they pay their taxes, I would be willing to pay higher taxes to take up the slack if we cut them off.

reply to post by marg6043


Well with most things you have to ask, "What or who is making profit?" Two faced. But who knows.

Also, COOL HAND, I would like to see a source for your claims:

Mayor Tom Bates... has joined Code Pink in their pickets in front of the Marine Recruiting Center

Code Pink has helped fund terrorist families in Iraq with a $600,000 gift.

Originally posted by Nyorai
Also, COOL HAND, I would like to see a source for your claims:

It is a well known fact about Code Pink sending money to Iraq under the pretense of Humanitarian assistance. Unfortunately they do not track what happens to the money when it gets there. Perhaps the whole amount didn't make it to the terrorists, but I am sure at least a good portion did.

You might want to check Move America Forward, they have been posting pics all day. Some even show the mayor with the Code Pinkers.

EDIT: Code Pink is bragging about that on their website

Barring that, Google is your friend.

[edit on 13/2/08 by COOL HAND]

Is one problem that I see from the whole deal in this city.

What an elected leader can do to keep the wishes of the majority that elected him.

If the city majority is the one wanting the Marines to be gone what can be done.

Isn't true that majority rule? or should the people be forced to accept what the federal government wants because repercussions, as financial repercussions.