lauantaina, syyskuuta 09, 2006

Asem demonstrations

Does anybody know what the demonstrators were demanding? I've been trying to follow the news a little bit, but have thus far been unable to deduce anything particular that they would have demanded or opposed. I heard a radio interview of a Leftist Alliance (vasemmistoliitto) youth organization member who seemed to be one of the organizers and he didn't even mention Asem when he was asked about the reasons for the demonstrations. Instead, he said that they've had big demonstrations in other capital cities during EU presidency and that it is important to allow people to demonstrate.

I'm perplexed. Why are these people demonstrating and why will nobody explain the reasons? Isn't it traditional that you try to forward some political position with a demonstration? Does anybody know why?

8 kommenttia:

Anonyymi kirjoitti...

Jotkut olivat marssimassa sosialismin puolesta. Oli oikein isot banderollit ja kaikki. Et tainnut pahemmin katsella TV-uutisia? =)

Mikko Särelä kirjoitti...

I don't have time for watching tv, at least I don't have time to sit down to watch something with the schedule that somebody else has decided and I wonder how anyone has. Instead, I tend to read my news from the net.

Thanks for the information. As I figured, nothing to do with Asem.

libertatisaequilibritas kirjoitti...

They were demonstrating against capitalism, neoliberalism, "America" generally and the big companies.

e.g. commies as usual

Who else?

ktel kirjoitti...

No, not even that. One dutch and probably even real anarchist was interviewed(hbl tue) and very disappointed with the finns who, in her opinion, had no plan, no ideas, no banners and nothing else to do than get drunk and throw a few bottles in order to provoke the finnish police.

Btw. She knew why she was here protesting(Assem)

Not saying that she's right though. But I do care about what issues are at stake, if any.

Why bother if you have nothing to say?

J kirjoitti...

It is alarming to notice that you show no concern for the people who were demonstrating peacefully (most of the people it seems) who were detained, interrogated and photographed by the police.

Now it seems the police can define who can demonstrate, and who can not.

If people DO riot or destroy property, fine, lock them up, great!

Bottom line is there was no 'riot' before the police surrounded the demonstrators, so the police were in fact provocating, and that is not acceptable in any sense.

Not acceptable considering our constitutional laws, international human rights laws, or even from moral or purely legislative point of view.

We need to draw the line!

And I dont mean writing blogs, I mean we need to demand that legislators and the ministry supervising the police to ensure this kind of blatant violation of finnish citizens constitutional rights does not happen again! (Or we will no longer have the priviledge of choosing what we want to demonstrate about)

J kirjoitti...

By the way, does this answer your question?

Ever hear of search engines? Our little media critical nerd, who dont even know how to use the google? C'mon try harder...

Mikko Särelä kirjoitti...

I did not talk about any riots here. I was just curious and _asking_ for information. Not curious enough, though, to go and look for the information from numerous possible sources myself. There's way too many things going on in this world for one to go out of your way to learn about everything. Unfortunately.

Thanks for the link, though. I agree with the reasons, though not the analysis of how it relates to capitalism. And probably not with their ideas about _how_ to correct the problems.

And not with the idea that one should spread disorder in Finland, if somebody is doing badly in China. Much better would be to figure out ways of making people do better in China. If you actually knew me, you would know that I have no love for dictatorships such as the Chinese one.

I also agree that the police probably acted illegally and immorally (by detaining people who did not have anything to do with the demonstration and by preventing a legal demonstration).
I did not blog about that, I did not blog about many things that have happened within last month because I have a life that's been quite busy. Do you?

By the way, do you keep a blog? Do _you_ write about all these outrages that you demand other people to write about? Do _you_ do your duty on this regard? Or do you just whine and tell other people to do, what is yours to do? Do you understand the difference between writing something as a hobby on your free time, and writing something as a journalist and being paid to do that?

I don't write about every evil and bad thing there is in this world. If I did, I wouldn't have time for anything else. Some people are not born with a silver spoon and actually have to work to get bread in their table. If you're not one of them, good for you.

This is my blog and I suggest you start using your skills at being courteous, or bugger off. I welcome disagreement, new information, but I do not like it when people who don't know me start accusing me of things behind the veil of anonymity.

J kirjoitti...

I do my best. Thats all I can. No blog atm but I have active correspondence in different medias. Busy too, thanks for the long reply, gtg.

Apologies for being and asshole, if that is the case.