Forget "Truthers" what about Agent Provocateurs at the March! That's the main concern.

I'm so glad Ron Paul is True Hope posted about agent provacateurs (sp?) lol. I had the same exact thought and was making a mental note to log on and post the exact same thing! Exactly the same thing: re: the provacateurs at the SPP summit in Quebec last year and re: Pier 57 in NYC during the Republican Nat'l Convention in '04, wasn't it?

Scene: hundreds, even thousands of police in full mob gear surround the march site, making the atmosphere less "fun" and more "scary." Unbeknownst to us, hired thugs wearing Ron Paul t-shirts join the march. We'd have no idea who they were. The media is ready and in position to film. The 'provacateurs' do something terribly stupid/illegal. On cue, the riot police rush in and start doing what riot police are trained to do to out-of-control mobs.

Yes, I'm actually concerned about this possibility. Truthfully, I'm not so sure this action will pay off. Not to talk about 911 again, but, just as an example, We Are Change.com had a HUGE 911 Truth march in NYC on the anniversary last September, and the media just ignored it. Unless you lived in NYC, I think most Americans don't even know it happened. BTW, these rallies in HUGE numbers were happening all over the world on that same day, and again, zippo in our tv news & newspapers. "Didn't even happen." Should something go wrong, and we get injured/jailed/receive bad press, it could potentially hurt the movement a great deal, and what's really to gain? If it goes well, the media won't cover it at all. It it goes very badly, it will be front page news. As we all know, the media is not on our side in this battle.

Our Continental Army used, as you know, guerilla warfare against the standing (literally!) British Army. It was extremely effective as you know and very frustrating for the British. Our numbers currently are spread across the whole US (and the world) making us, as a group, a very difficult target to hit. Wouldn't an enemy LOVE to have thousands of us all packed together like sardines in a tight little space for about twelve hours? I mean, think about it.

It's really a substantial risk. That's all I'm saying.

Let's pls continue to discuss this and give it some thought before we act.

You simply keep this in the spirit of 1776 -- it's to restore the government under the Constitution, not to overthrow the government as our adversaries are tryhing to do.

AND, everyone should READ page 110 of Andrew Napolitano's book "A Nation of Sheep" and learn how NOT to fall for confrontations.

And how to spell it correctly.

Q: Are you a member of dailypaul.com?
A: Yes.
Q: Is your account doing the 404?
A: Yes.

Begone foul imp.

See, easy!

I do not understand why people cant seem to understand

The marchers simply need to police themselves.

If someone starts chucking rocks at police, or smashing store windows, they may be an agent provacatuer or they may just be a jerk. It makes no difference, we have a right to peaceably assemble, not riot, destroy property, and cause public disorder.

If someone starts damaging property or inciting violence, demand that they stop immediately, if they refuse, forcibly remove them from the march. If you don't the whole group is painted as a mob, and the police will push all of you off the street.

A free people have to police themselves, so if someone is doing violence among you show them the door. You have every right to intervene to protect people and property.

Deb

So would i be considered an agent provacateur if my thing is being against the war on drugs and lit up a doob?

My personal take on the matter is: There are those who talk about freedom. And there are those who exercise it. One could technically argue that Ron Paul's undying support for civil disobedience would in fact encourage me to do as such.

I mean, his heroes are Ganhdi and MLK, Rosa Parks, etc...

And i aint no hippy - i would likely be dressed like I just got back from golfing. I accept any and all risk that i could be cited or arrested.

I will add the following thought i borrowed from someone else that is pertinent to this issue: "Getting libertarians to all agree on something is about as pointless as herding cats." The idea here being that we are all somewhat anti-authoritarian in nature. As soon as we start saying who cannot and can come and how they can dress, protest, what signs are acceptable, who is an agent of the government, what ideas or conspiracies or whatever, etc... you will instantly see "who the fuck died and made you boss" type reactions. Which all these threads on this topic WILL eventually devolve into.

Just watch. Its already happening! Big tent v little tent!

Honestly, i really do get sick of the free mummia peeps. They were handing out shit at every anti-war rally in Chicago and asking for money for this guy. Ughhhh. But who the hell am I to tell them their cause is pointless and that they should therefore exercise their right to be stupid somewhere else?

If you embrace freedom, you embrace both the good and the bad aspects of it. I would hope that the good outweighed the bad - but i certainly wouldn't pretend to be the ONE who decided what is "good" or "bad" If i wanted that, I would vote for & support McInsane!!

Hell, even if Dr Paul himself were to take it upon himself to lay the ground rules...i think most people would instantly question HIS authority in this area. Which is exactly what HE would do if someone tried to do it to him. So yeah...might as well embrace the whirlwind. You cant control the uncontrollable and it would be counter productive to even try.

My title asks "What is acceptable?" But it really is pointing at the more important question, "Who" decides. Think long and hard about that and Ron Paul's embrace of freedom before answering.