Those Hilarious Anarchists........

Lost Cause

It's a wrap!
Joined
Oct 7, 2001
Posts
30,949
What fun! Destroy personal property, make friends! Get allies for your cause! Fuck up any progress toward meaningful dialogue!

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - An online "anarchist scavenger hunt" proposed for next week's annual meeting of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank here has raised the ire of police, who fear demonstrators could damage property and wreak havoc.
***
Break a McDonald's window, get 300 points. Puncture a Washington D.C. police car tire to win 75 points. Score 400 points for a pie in the face of a corporate executive or World Bank delegate.

D.C. Assistant Police Chief Terrance Gainer told a congressional hearing on Friday that law authorities were in talks to decide whether planned protests were, "so deleterious to security efforts that we ought to take proactive action."

Several thousand people are expected to demonstrate outside the IMF and World Bank headquarters next weekend.

The Anti-Capitalist Convergence, a D.C.-based anarchist group, is also planning a day-long traffic blockade, banner-drops and protests against major corporations in the downtown core.

Chuck, the 37 year-old webmaster of the anarchist site www.infoshop.org who declined to give his last name, told Reuters his scavenger hunt was meant as a joke.

"People were asking for things to do when they come to D.C. We made the list to get people thinking, so they don't do the boring, standard stuff," he said. "I doubt people will actually keep track of what they do for points."



:D
 
Lost Cause said:
"People were asking for things to do when they come to D.C. We made the list to get people thinking, so they don't do the boring, standard stuff," he said. "I doubt people will actually keep track of what they do for points."

Chuck seriously underestimates the stupidity of some people. The police obviously think that some people will participate in this "scavenger hunt," whether they keep score or not.

I wonder if McDonald's is going to sue "Chuck" for every broken window they have during the annual meeeting. Can people who get pied sue him? Should they?
 
Re: Re: Those Hilarious Anarchists........

Weird Harold said:


Chuck seriously underestimates the stupidity of some people. The police obviously think that some people will participate in this "scavenger hunt," whether they keep score or not.

I wonder if McDonald's is going to sue "Chuck" for every broken window they have during the annual meeeting. Can people who get pied sue him? Should they?

there are some who willl brag about their score though...
 
Re: Re: Those Hilarious Anarchists........

Weird Harold :
"I wonder if McDonald's is going to sue "Chuck" for every broken window they have during the annual meeeting. Can people who get pied sue him? Should they?"


I'm certain people will try to sue Chuck, however, I don't think they should.
 
Re: Re: Re: Those Hilarious Anarchists........

Never said:
I'm certain people will try to sue Chuck, however, I don't think they should.

Why not?

If his bad joke incites people to break McDonald's windows isn't he an accessory at the very least?
 
By that same token, if I write a book telling people to break windows, I’m to blame if they break windows.
If I write a song telling people to break windows, I’m to blame if they break windows.

That goes against my belief in personal responsibility.
 
This American cult of 'children worship' has to stop.

These little assholes are not the children of the working people. They, for the most part, are children of the middle class. The ones that 'mom' drove to soccer practice and home again.

I learned early on that anything given for 'free' has no value whatsoever. So, the deal with my kids was simple. You want it, get your ass out of the house, get a job, and buy it. Bobby's dad got himeone? Fine, go ask Bobby's dad to get one for you too.

I found that the boys were generally too busy to get into trouble and what they bought for themselves, they took care of. Amazing.

Ishmael
 
I'm surprised that big business hasn't used the same tactics.

1) $10k for beating the shit out of some hippy that's caught defacing property for "points."

2) $20k for beating the crap out of said kid, and marching him to his parents house, and then beating the crap out of them.

3) $1 Mil for sterilizing said kid's entire family.
 
Never said:
By that same token, if I write a book telling people to break windows, I’m to blame if they break windows.
If I write a song telling people to break windows, I’m to blame if they break windows.

That goes against my belief in personal responsibility.

If youwrite a book or song depicting people breaking windows, you're not inciting people to break windows.

If you write a book telling people to break windows, then you're inciting an illegal act.

There is a difference between writing about something and telling someone to do something. Especially if you tell them you're going to "reward" them with points for doing as you tell them to do.
 
I don't know. All due respect, WH, I'm not sure I buy that. I mean, Christ, the Bible actually says things to the efect of "kill adulterers," right? Okay, I'm certainly no theologian so I could be wrong about it being adulterers, but I know it says kill someone somewhere in there, dammit :). So if your average Christian goes out and knocks off a few cheaters, are they absolved from responsibility in the eyes of the law because someone told them to do it? Doesn't that set up a pretty dangerous situation?

I still believe in personal responsibility as well. Unless I have a gun to your head or can threaten you in some similar way, I can't make you do something. The choice is still yours. Chuck's an idiot, but I don't think he should be sued.
 
Graymouse said:
So if your average Christian goes out and knocks off a few cheaters, are they absolved from responsibility in the eyes of the law because someone told them to do it? Doesn't that set up a pretty dangerous situation

Nope, Christians who commit crimes "because the bible says to" should not be absolved of their crimes because "someone told them to do it.

Those who folow the instructions of rabble-rousers and instigators bear the primary responsibility for their crimes. However, should those rabble rousers and instigators who incited people to commit crimes be absolved of all responsibility for the crimes committed?

Every state and the federal government have statutes that make "inciting a riot" a crime. Why should "Chuck" go scott free, just because his incitement to commit vandalism was intended as a bad joke. He probably should not be sued, but charged under the "incitement to riot" statutes.
 
Ishmael said:
This American cult of 'children worship' has to stop.

These little assholes are not the children of the working people. They, for the most part, are children of the middle class. The ones that 'mom' drove to soccer practice and home again.

I learned early on that anything given for 'free' has no value whatsoever. So, the deal with my kids was simple. You want it, get your ass out of the house, get a job, and buy it. Bobby's dad got himeone? Fine, go ask Bobby's dad to get one for you too.

I found that the boys were generally too busy to get into trouble and what they bought for themselves, they took care of. Amazing.

Ishmael


Fuckin'ay, man. It's like you're channeling my husband, or something. Funny, it reminds me of watching the Sopranos earlier and screaming at the TV for Carmella and Tony to just slap the crap out of Meadow, throw her shit out and the lawn and lock the fucking door.
 
I wonder if the British tea merchants thought to sue the "indians" who destroyed all that loverly tea by tossing it into Boston Harbor about 230 years ago? Or did they just get the government to send in troops?
 
Back
Top