POLITICS: Police Empowered to Halt G8 Protests

The governor of Georgia has declared a pre-emptive state of emergency in coastal Georgia from May 31st until June 20th. This was originally reported by the Associated Press on May 24th, 2004. A recently ammended City Council law, allows police to disband any protests when a "state of emergency or disaster is lawfully declared." Gov. Sonny Perdue cited "potential danger ... from unlawful assemblages, threats of violence and otherwise" during the days leading up to and following the G8 summit on June 8-10.


The text of this article appears to be unavailable on the AP website (as this information is now more than 7 days old). However, an internet search will still find many sites which have quoted and referenced the original AP article.

I, myself, am somewhat alarmed by the existence of a "pre-emptive state of emergency." It appears that a historic precedent has been set regarding this concept. I am also suprised that this has slipped by unnoticed for more than a week.

At the same time, I feel that it is very important that we protect our leaders, and the leaders of other countries, during such a high profile encounter as the G8 summit. With the intelligence agencies predicting a "Summer of Terror," America needs to take unprecedented precautions to protect such high profile events.

I suppose it is safe to say that I have mixed feelings about the implications of such a precedent. I hope that this is an isolated event, and that none of these policies become standard practice in American government.

I am not currently aware of any reputable news organizations, other than the AP, or any ATS discussions regarding this topic.

--J1M

[Edited on 2-6-2004 by Zion Mainframe]

[Edited on 2-6-2004 by John bull 1]

[Edited on 2-6-2004 by Just1Man]

[Edited on 2-6-2004 by Zion Mainframe]

Interesting, but I'm scared this submission will disappear soon without getting published.

Some mods have judgement biased by them political opinions...

Originally posted by Nans DESMICHELS
Some mods have judgement biased by them political opinions...

Is that so, Nans?

Some bits and pieces from the Atlanta Independent Media Center
(They appear to have big plans for G-8 protests.)

I wasn't able to locate anything applicable on these sites, but just in case you want some background:

A link to the City of Brunswick homepage.
The Virtual Home Office of Georgia's Governor's Office.
And the G8 website.

I've also been unable to find details of the law that was ammended to facilitate this (i.e. Full text of the law prior to ammendment, and full text of the law post-ammendment).

Any Georgians out there that can shed any light on the topic?

--J1M

I'm not at all surprised by the governor's actions. All G-8 meetings seem to bring out the radical, and often violent, fringe element. Given the history of violent protests, as well as the potential for terrorist activities, I thing the governor would have been remiss if he hadn't taken the action. BTW, for those ready to jump all over this, no this isn't martial law!

I am a resident of GA and nothing never happends around here, something like this is amazing, the police even have to carry gas mask and equipment, a few weeks ago the base in albany ran a simulation in case of a terrorist attack including local police and emergency agencies together with the military.

Does the military is involve on this going to help with the protest? Or I am getting paranoid

except that we have a constitutional right to protest, but i guess that document is "out-dated"...i think this will be a precedent that affects many protests of dissent

I suppose that our right to assembly will be abridged for this one specific time, for this one specific event.

I think that the protesters should be allowed to congregate and demonstrate at another site, far enough away from the G8 meetings, as long as they do so within applicable laws.

The protesters should arrange with the media for coverage, and the media will determine if it is newsworthy and cover it accordingly.

Everybody achieves their goals. A compromise, not perfect, but workable.
Those that object can thank the terrorists for the inconvenience.

Nans:

I'm fairly new here, and I know that mods have political leanings like anyone else, but what you said was unfair. I've never had anything moved or deleted or whatever without a mod sending me a u2u explaining what they did and why, as well as asking for feedback if I needed further clarification. I don't know where you're coming from, and don't care to get into a discussion on it.

The right to protest - Yes. The right to disrupt the lives of others, destroy property and carry out violent acts - No.

yea, and that kind of attitude will eventually lead to prosecution of those who don't agree with the government...you know why...because they can create dissent among their fellow citizens with their views, which can potentially lead to terrorist acts....is this what you want, have u ever read 1984?

and you can claim all you want that it will never come to that...but the fact is we are all ignorant of the future unless we create it..there is also an interesting pseudo-quote about how the gov. came for the catholics, came for the muslims, came for gays, came for the whatever hell else but i never stood up...and then i found out i was the only one left and they came for me...

why don't u predict my fortune commonsense since you seem so great at it?

France is banning protests against Bush this week(and they didnt even have to declare a state of emergency!)....was gonna start a new thread but decided to post this here instead...mods delete if ya wanna....thought it was relevant

Demonstrations have been banned in central Paris throughout this week to ensure no hostile protests are in evidence to disturb President George W. Bush's brief presence in the French capital on Saturday, where he will be dining with President Jacques Chirac.

France Bans Protests

oh yeh heres a link to a group that protests the protesters...kinda funny

Protest Warriors

check out the posters, tshirts and bumper stickers they use...gave me a good laugh

[Edited on 3-6-2004 by Creepy]

So...I guess they are for the "core value" of the right to protest. I just hope the protest warriors aren't along the same lines as Bush in that people can protest as long they don't protest what the government thinks is best. I wonder if they believe people can say what they want or if people shouldn't protest things they (protest warriors) don't believe is right.

Well...I'd have to agree with CommonSense's point about what chaos has ensued at past G8 "protests". Protesting is one thing--flat out rioting is another.

Not to mention what a tempting target this particular meeting is for any terrorist. That many world leaders in one room is just too good to pass up. If they can possibly hit it, they will!

Just because they have called a pre-emptive state emergency and stopped protests doesn't mean a terrorist can't strike them...

But even if you weren't going to allow the protests to take place on the island, why does a state emergency barring all protests, even on the mainland from occuring. It's like saying you can no longer protest the G-8 because we know you're going to riot, give people stiffer penalties for turning into a riot...

The way they are going about this and the precedents that are being established are alarming in my opinion.

Originally posted by jsobeckyNans:

I'm fairly new here, and I know that mods have political leanings like anyone else, but what you said was unfair. I've never had anything moved or deleted or whatever without a mod sending me a u2u explaining what they did and why, as well as asking for feedback if I needed further clarification. I don't know where you're coming from, and don't care to get into a discussion on it.

I'd tryied to start a spiritual discussion about abortion, and my post was sended to trash bin by a mod.
I'm agree with medicalized abortion, and of course, the mod who deleted it is against abortion.

It not the first time a mod abuse of his power. The same mod done so with a thread criticizing the american foreign politic in Mud-Pit. I received a warning about this thread. If I had some hard word against the american foreign politic, I didn't used censored words. Another member started to insult me in this thread, but I was forced to complaint to another mod for that member get a warning.

Zion, You can't contest that sometime, mods judgement are really biased. I can't tell you how many insults I received by some members just because I'm french, and they never received any warning. but the only time I've "insulted", in covered words, another ATS members, I received several messages and warnings from mods.

Nans DESMICHELS

We are humans and I know what you mean, about some members or mods, but this bring into perspective that the same way we let emotions and personal preferences take over common sense and become bias, so politicians and leaders do the same thing, and people in peace protest will let emotions go rampant. I call it the human condition and we all have it or we will not be humans.

Jamuhn

The way they are going about this and the precedents that are being established are alarming in my opinion.

I wouldn't be too alarmed. Precedent has already been set, by Zell Miller during the '96 Olympics. And look what happened there - wacko terrorist managed to set off a bomb anyway.

I think it makes good sense to control the arena.