Note: this is the 4th of multiple posts discussing the rally and issues that occurred on Wednesday evening in Bloomfield. I am going to write multiple short posts that talk about various parts of the whole of the evening. I know I will get negative comments on some (maybe all) of these posts. We all are entitled to our opinions. I thought about trying to write a single summarizing post, but it would end up being 8000 words long and no one would read it, so small posts about differing parts of the evening.

Some folks have commented on my other posts, mentioning anarchists, and I wanted to followup with that thread. I believe there is a queer anarchist contingent here in Pittsburgh. I personally believe everyone is entitled to their own political and social structural beliefs; it is a free country. Yet, we have as a civil society chosen a set of laws and processes by which we act and expect each other to behave. This is by definition counter to what an anarchist expects, so there is a tension and base dissonance that has to be acknowledged.

While standing in Friendship Park, between the time of the rally section on Liberty Ave and when things got crazy, I spoke briefly with a young woman who told me that the police were, by definition evil and bad, because they are an “arm of the state.” According to her, the police are trained to dehumanize people and trained/encouraged to use their power excessively to subdue people. She was calm and spoke without any passion in her voice. I asked how she knew this, and she said she had read a lot.

I do not know if this mentality was a small subset of the folks present, or the prevailing mindset of the majority of rally participants, but either way, if folks like this were active, then there was bound to be trouble erupting. That one of the men arrested had also been arrested during the G-20 responsible for $15,000 of damage to shops in Oakland, lends some justification to thinking that anarchists were responsible for the event getting out of hand. No matter what the police did or didn’t do, they the police were, to these folks, the problem.

So all of the headlines this week that talked about this as an LGBT rally, might be wrong! It may have originated as that- a rally against homophobia within the Bloomfield community, but then it got co-opted? Taken over, or used by anarchists or queer anarchists for their own purpose which was to lash out at any sense of authority.

I received calls and emails from a number of LGBT Rights organizations when they saw the newspaper headlines. I wonder what the rest of the Pittsburgh LGBTQ community thought. I believe only the name of the one person has been released, and when Channel 4 uses a headline like:

Gay Rights Demonstrators Taken Into Custody After Protest

Were those arrested gay rights demonstrators or simply anarchists using this event for their own agenda?

I’ve thought long and hard this week about what does it mean to fight for the rights of the LGBTQ community, when  some of that whole community, want nothing to do with the social structure and government upon and within which we operate. And I’m really left not sure how I feel.And I’ve started to think much about the notion of “queer,” and wondering if I really know what that means.


  1. The major point though of any comment should be refuting the false dichtomy you are creating. Many younger queers are anarchists, and so there can never be an event they attend that is not a manifestation of both those identities, all the more because anarchist queers see these positions as inter-related. It would be extremely difficult to be an anarchist and not agree with most of queer theory.

    Intersectionality is a main force within anarchist movements approach to these questions. For those unfamilar with this concept, this passage probably sums up best where folks are coming from-

    “What might political organization look like based on a common commitment to
    ending domination rather than an assumed common experience based on some single
    identity? These questions began to be answered largely by feminists of color,
    queers, and sex radicals with the theory of intersectionality–a theory that was
    critical of traditional class and identity politics (see especially e.g. hooks
    2000; Collins 2000).

    Intersectionality posits that our social locations
    in terms of race, class, gender, sexuality, nation of origin, ability, age, etc.
    are not easily parsed out one from the other. To speak of a universal experience
    as a “woman”, for example, is problematic because “womanhood” is experienced
    quite differently based on race, class, sexuality– any number of factors. As
    such, a non-reflective feminist movement centered ostensibly on the concerns of
    “women” tended to reflect the interests of the most privileged members of that
    social category.

    As well, our various social locations and the
    hierarchies they inform intersect in complex ways and are not easily separable.
    People don’t exist as “women”, “men”, “white”, “working class”, etc. in a vacuum
    devoid of other patterned social relationships.”

    So there exists a fundamental difference between radical queers/anarchists understanding of the world and mainstream GLTBQ folks who do not ascribe to intersectionality. And this comes out in a difficulty in processing events that occur.

    I saw many of the same faces at this as attended the previous rally against gay bashing. What you see as being “hijacked” by anarchists is simply the point when those same people shifted tactics. But tactics do not = identities, as evidenced by the fact the exact same people can attend an event with no police problems as one with police problems. Nor could someone “hijack” an event by engaging in the very activity (marching) that the main organizer announced to the crowd would be happening. Actually, a stronger case (though I’d still disagree) could be made that people who didn’t participate in marching were hijacking the event in not following the direction of organizers. All in all I think a much better question to ask would be what meaning can we find in the failure of the more mainstream GLBTQ community to address these issues such that people feel it necessary to support other means. Views don’t appear out of nowhere. Rather than continuously harp on the fact one thinks radical queers are just wrong it might be useful to reflect on the fact mainstream GLBTQ approaches in terms of the police and responses to gay-bashing are not resonating among many people. We can digress into the various results of this fissures but such an approach is fairly useless if one can’t even identify what’s happening and why.

    • There are some really wonderful thoughts and ideas expressed here. I have a question however. When you talk about an event where there was no police issue, I think there are some missing pieces. For that event (rally after Verucca’s bashing), I believe the police were alerted before the event that it was happening, and and several of the speakers were from mainstream LGBT organizations. There may even have been a permit for it, but with or without the permit, the police were alerted by rally organizers or others inside the LGBT community so that the rally went peacefully. While many of these same young queers were there, there were also many many others were there who were not at this recent event. The crowd was quite different.

      Thanks for adding your comments.

  2. I’m going to completely disregard all of the blatant ignorance and self-indulgent rhetoric in this “article” to bring you one, very important news flash:


    Intersectionality of social justice issues?! Blows your fucking mind, I know. Don’t hurt yourself thinking too hard about that one.

  3. Anarchy_is_bad says:

    disposable anarchists-kids get their marching orders from communist adults who supply them with bail money and other material goods/services. once President Obama is out of office, these anarchists will slowly fade away.

    • what is the link between Obama and anarchists?

      • Anarchy_is_communism says:

        communist adults got President Obama elected and the communists recruited disposable white kids with pot, cases of PBR, and bedtime stories of a magical lifestyle of anarchism where these kids no longer have to be responsible for their actions (ask an anarchist about shoplifting).

        japenga is a perfect example of the communists in action. Who do you think payed his bail when he first got pinched in Sept 2009?

      • Anarchy_is_Stupendous says:

        Yeah don’t you all know. Anarchy started with Obama. It didn’t exist before that.

      • Anarchy_is_communism says:

        No, anarchists have achieved their “peak” with President Obama being in office, much like when goths hit their peak with that Geraldo Rivera special about Satanism in 1987. Anarchism is just a fad that will go away when Saul Alinksy’s President Obama is out of office.

      • Anarchy_is_Great says:

        Hahahaha you are awesome hahahahaha

    • Cstrigiform says:

      Hahahahaha this comment is amazing. You and tcwaters should go bowling.

    • Anarchy_is_Awesome says:

      ? ? ?

    • Man, I WISH Obama would pay our fuckin’ bail. Or any other material goods/services.

  4. Strigiform says:

    Every post you write digs you deeper as well as the queer community. You’re still looking for activists to blame for stuff, taking the focus off the cops and other bashers that are the real people who caused this stuff. There were all sorts of people at that event from upper class white centrist pro police gay men to anarcho queers. It was pretty cool how they all came together to support each other.

    But here you are, as people like you usually do, looking to find a way to scapegoat “the anarchists” for the “trouble bound to erupt”. (Which I guess you mean is the absolute HORROR at which people walked down the street of their own neighborhood in solidarity with each other [well, except you I guess], marching for their own liberation).

    The “anarchists” did not take this event over. The police did. Period. The event was going perfectly fine with all kinds of people there until the police came along, yelling, threatening, shoving, and arresting people.

    And please educate yourself on anarchism before writing about them more. Their ideas are about anti-authoritarianism, not about anti-structure or anti rules. You watch too much hollywood. And yes, cops are trained to dehumanize people. If you’re ever arrested or taken to jail, which hopefully you won’t be, you’ll be able to see this.

    All this blogging on your part where you seem to think you are coming up with amazing epiphanies about “the movement” is just you doing what you’ve been doing the whole time- feeding right into the hands of anti-homo people and violent police by focusing on blaming fellow queers rather than the bashers who caused all these problems.

    To answer your last question, it seems to me that you definitely don’t know what queer means. Mainstream Upper Class fellow queer-blaming Gay maybe, but not queer.

    • It its always such a joy to read your little delusional rants.  It you truly don’t grasp the relationship between authority, rules and civil structure, that I have been giving you more credit than you deserve.

      I think I have done a good job being quite clear. My posts are expressed my perspective of what I saw and experienced and what I think of it.  I’m not big on blame and quite honestly casting blame does little to help create understanding of what happened. 

      When you say, “the bashers who caused all the problems” who would that be. I saw no bashers and no one bashed. Or do you mean people like Japenga who did $15,000 of damage in Oakland? While I don’t know, I wouldn’t be surprised that once the police realized he was there, they wanted to make sure that no damage to businesses was caused in Bloomfield.

      I don’t buy into your victim mentality of one side gets blamed and the other is innocent. I’m more interested in understanding the dynamics between people that lead things to go from one point to another.

      You say than anarchists aren’t anti-rule, but the reality is that there was one simple rule: a crowd can not gather and block a sidewalk or street. The crowd can march (protected 1st amendment) but the sidewalk can not be blocked.

      When the police asked the group to move from Liberty Ave to Friendship Park, it was all about that rule. But hey, you’re not anti-rule are you?  LOL.

      • Strigiform says:

        OMG LOL YOU’RE SO MATURE LOL. How old are you dude? I’m realizing I have wasted a lot of my time arguing with someone this…. I can’t really find the words. But, yeah. Blaming each other (cuz, no matter how ya slice it bro that’s what you’re doing) for unfortunate outcomes and brutality at events is a psychological response that is all too common unfortunately. Hopefully when this all boils down you’ll quit this garbage and get a life. And you know, find some unity with queers instead of just the cops. Ta ta now.

      • Hey, I would have been happy if you had stopped arguimg a long time ago.  But I would be surprised if that is a part of your nature. I bet you LOVE to argue. I honestly wish you would start a blog! 

      • People who “lol” should get off the internet. We all know you’re silently typing at your keyboard, not laughing in an audible fashion.

      • Anarchy_is_communism says:


      • I’m kind of continually amazed at your own lack of understanding regarding privilage, and how privilage is going to directly impact ones views of the world around them. In your other account you describe your encounter while filming. Do you believe that would have gone the same if you looked differently? More like a punk? Younger? I ask this because what YOU did at the rally was significantly more illegal/provocative/spiting authority than the actions of some of those who I DID see get arrested. While some were grabbed off the sidewalk you were in the road, while some had no actual interactions with the police you disobeyed a police request, etc.

        My only other comment is that I think you might benefit from considering that your comments regarding David Japenga very much come across as if you believe he deserved to get arrested simply for being present. The GLBTQ community has a long history in this regard. The police have always used accusations of disorder and the so called presence of bad characters as a pretext for general repression. Once someone has a criminal record it becomes very easy and tempting to justify harassment of queers, raids on gay gathering points, as cracking down on criminals because they can simply scoop up a known bad apply and point to them.

        How is your references to police actions possibly being a result of just seeing David present any different than activists flipping out for seeing police they’ve previously had bad encounters with (in this case the cop Lando) I ask because in your own video you talk to someone about being able to treat people as people, and your inability to apply this to how the police should interact with people who are prior lawbreakers comes across as very hypocritical.

      • Wow, thanks for such a comment.I personally think it is interesting how we attribute things that happen to one thing or another. for example, you question if what I experienced (and I don’t know what part) would have been different if I looked more punk or was younger. I don’t think those things would have made any difference.

        I know of a different rally that was held without a permit a few years ago, where the organizer, who is considerably younger, when he got to the space, went directly up to police who were already there, and introduced himself and told the officer what was planned. The officer told him where the group could be, and they complied and there wasn’t any trouble. 

        I think the way I worked with the police as opposed to calling them homphobic pigs had more to do with how I got treated than my age or how I looked.

        Please cite what I supposedly did that was ” significantly more illegal/provocative/spiting authority” I did nothing that was outside my authority as a citizen. Now, you and I can argue that what I did was more *something* than people blocking the sidewalk, but the truth of the matter is that the law says you can’t block the sidewalk.  The only requests I disobeyed were those that the officer had no right to make. Knowing your rights is a good thing. I want to also say, I don’t personally believe that all arrests were warrented. I only saw 1 arrest, and I don’t believe that person did anything to be arrested for. I also believe that anyone standing where he was at the time could have been the person grabbed by the officer.

        I have no idea if any of the people who were arrested, including Japenga deserved to be arrested. I didn’t see hos arrest, and have no idea what prompted it. I only know that the police were there because someone called 911, the police arrived, they were clear about what the crowd could or could not do by the law, and then people got arrested. I also know that Japenga has a history of causing significant damage. Thise are both true statements.

        I am not justifying the harrassment of queers. I only said that I never say queers harassed. I don’t believe that the harassment of queers or anyone else is acceptable. I am saying however that what others are calling harassment might not seem like harassment to someone else. anyone is capable of making any accusation of harrasment that they want to make. Doesn’t make it true. I encourage anyone who feels they were harrassed to file a complaint and work with the ACLU which is currently collecting statements from people who were there. Truly, the police in the most general sense have a reputation for harrassment. I feel the way I was treated was intentional intimidation. I believe it is critical to hold the police accountable for any actions they did which were not professional or appropriate. Just to be clear I don’t believe anyone deserves to be harrassed and especially by the police. However, I think it is possible to label actions as harrassment when it isn’t. When it is harrassment (or if you think it is, I urge everyone to file a complaint.

        I can’t agree that I do not treat Japenga as a person. Mostly because I have no idea why the police arrested him. Treating someone like a person doesn’t mean gnoring what that person has done. but you are entitled to your own opinion. I’m not going to convince you of anythng and I don’t care.

      • Strigiform says:

        How does your large intestine look?

      • Ummm, you stated in one of your posts you were “standing in the road.” In a video that was posted I see YOU standing in the road filming the arrest of a protester. This is against the law, and this is significantly more illegal than the actions of someone grabbed off the sidewalk who was simply walking. I don’t understand your previous comment in light of this. My point was what you did (standing road) got others arrested while you were not. That makes me wonder about why you were treated differently. You believe that it was because you interacted with the police differently than others. As I saw people grabbed who had never directly had any personal interactions with the police I question this position and feel it’s as likely, if not more so, that you were treated differently because of how you look. I’m suprised you dismiss this possibility.

      • I think my previous comment isn’t so hard to understand. When I was told to move I did move, this complying with a police officer’s command. 

        I would be really careful before you start accusing me of anything, please:
        “My point was what you did (standing road) got others arrested while you were not.”

        All arrests were either completed or began before I ever got to Pearl St. I didn’t get anyone anything. You negate any real point point you have to make by making such unfounded accusations.

        I believe I wasn’t arrested for a number of factors, although none of them were my age or how I look. One was because I complied with the officer’s demands. When I was told to move I did. Also, how many people were marching/walking? I’d say between 30 and 50? How many people were arrested? 5. There were many people who were “simply walking” who were not arrested.  I don’t wish to speculate why the officers arrested the people that they did. If there are court dates, we will find out. However, I did write about one arrest a person in a grey Tshirt. I have his name but am not publishing it. While I didn’t see the police officer grab him, I don’t believe he did anything to be arrested for. This I already wrote. Of the other 4, it may be they did nothing or they did something, I don’t know I didn’t see the arrests. 

        I was told that at least some people specifically stepped off of the sidewalk infront of the police car to block it, and refused to move wheen they were told to move. I don’t know if this is true or untrue, but if it is true, then how I acted and how they acted were pretty different.

        When an officer came running towards me with a can up at my face, if I had said “No,” or failed to move, I think I would have been sprayed and/or arrested. Instead, as he yelled at me to get the hell out of there, I moved and moved quickly to the sidewalk.

        I was also in a odd position. I was both rally participant, person who had spoken to the crowd, and I was taping as an observer/blogger. Back on Libery Ave, I taped the exchange that I posted in my blog post about anger at the rally. This “established me” as an observer. I hesitate to say journalist because I wasn’t acting as a jounalist, but clearly as media of some sort. It was clear to the police at that time, that my goal was for there to be a rally where people could voice their feelings and no one got arrested. While I know you won’t buy it, that is what the police wanted as well.

        It is equally surprising that you are so ung up on the idea that it is because of what I look like. Probably because you are so sure that the arrests were based on how people looked.

      • You misunderstood my comment. I wasn’t saying you standing in the road resulted in other people getting arrested, I was saying the actions you did (standing in road) were the same kind of actions that when done by others resulted in thier arrests. Does that make sense? It’s odd to me that you retreat to the position that you complied with officers orders as if that negates the lawbreaking involved. Standing in the street is never legal without a permit. Similarly, you can not be both a participant and an observer in the eyes of the law. If you are a participant that has been ordered to disperse you can’t then say oh, now I’m only observing.

      • Additionally, you did disobey officers orders when they asked people to go to Friendship Park back on Liberty Ave. All in all these disgressions aren’t particularly interesting to me, I only mention them because of the odd way you frame the actions of others, and the bizarre seperations you make between your own actions and that of this other element. I think from the perspective of most people present you would be included on the side of trouble-makers if we were to split people into a dichotomy of those breaking the law and those who were not. I was not on the street, did not speak at the rally, mostly just observed, and this is how I see it for instance. I’m not against the actions of you or others, it just leaves a bad impression looking at the way you seem to contort events to maintain your own views of the police, your own position as one of the good people, and a negative view towards anarchist queers as the protogonists of disorder. The last point for instance when you ignore that it was the organizers themselves who announced at friendship park that we would be “marching.”  

      • he has every right to have a negative view of anarchists. anarchists are a leech on society and where ever they go, trouble follows.

      • it’s strange you view this as a “right” Well, ok. I have a “right” to have a negative view of you for holding an opinion I disagree with. Perception is a funny thing you know. To the passerby inconvienenced by TCW talking at the rally he is a leech, to the police sent to the rally everyone present is a leech, to the person pushed by a police officer with an attitude problem the police they pay taxes for are a leech, to TCM the people who aren’t him who break the law may be leeches. It’s a leech eat leech world.

      • what?

      • what?

      • yeah

      • agreed.

      • This is the STRANGEST reply to date on my blog. Of course everyone has a right to their own opinion, and you can feel as negatively towards another person as you like. I encourage everyone to share their opinions here, some I agree with and some I do not. 

        I am struck however at the drama-ridden sense of this message however:
        “To the passerby inconvienenced by TCW talking at the rally he is a leech”

        Really?  I doubt it. My guess is that the passerby I am an annoyance or an obstacle. The degree of judgementalism and the all or nothing type thinking is just insane in my opinion.

        “to the police sent to the rally everyone present is a leech,”

        This is definitely not true. Why not let the police speak for themselves, because you certainly don’t know what they would say.

        This “leech eat leech” mentality is what leads me to see no positive value in an anarchic mindset and action. I don’t live in a world like that, and I’m sorry that you do.

        I live in a world of an imperfect democracy where people, together work to fix those things that don’t work with the hope it gets better and better, and is fair to more and more people. 

      • Jeez. I’m really trying hard to be respectful on these comments but it seems you do not read things closely and respond to things people do not express. I was merely replying to the other commentator who mentioned your “right” to view anarchists as leeches or whatever nonsense. The point is, these are entirely subjective views based on ones relationship to the person in question. Of course there is a large segment of society that views protesters (yourself included) as leeches. Sigh. I get the impression from your responses here you are not used to debates. I would recommend such activities as they will sharper your skills.

      • Strigiform says:

        Nope, pretty plenty of people there thought you were a leech. Not just passersby.

      • Actually I didn’t disobey the officer because I did move to Friendship Park, so I’m unclear what you are talking about. 

        Can you cite a place (with a quote?) of how I “frame others”?  thx.

        In terms of a dichotomy- haven’t you been reading what I write at all?  I don’t think, nor do I feel a dichotomy applies in any way. The attempt to look at people as if they fit in one group or another is YOUR STUFF, and the problem, not a part of the solution. I don’t see the world that way.

      • I was there when officers said to move. You and a small portion of the crowd choose to remain on Liberty Ave. I know you didn’t go elsewhere because you took a video of part of the interactions on Liberty Ave AFTER the police had told you and others to move. By talking about your selective/defensive interpretation of events I notice here that you continue to not address the fact you broke the law by being in the street. Your need to maintain your identity as someone who is lawful and complies with police orders is unfortunete. Sigh. As far as the frame issue. Here. I’ll help. “Framing, a term used in media studies, sociology and psychology, refers to the social construction of a social phenomenon by mass media sources or specific political or social movements or organizations. It is an inevitable process of selective influence over the individual’s perception of the meanings attributed to words or phrases. A frame defines the packaging of an element of rhetoric in such a way as to encourage certain interpretations and to discourage others.” That is the definition of frame I was refering (Clearly given the context) not an attempt to implicate others in something they did not do.

      • I was there and he was totally lawful. Sigh.

      • The concept of you claiming this, and this video existing- Oh, look starting at second 40. Hmm, who is that STANDING IN THE STREET. Come on man, I get it that you want to have your friends back but this ridiculous and silly attempt by all of you to pretend that TCW never stood in the street is just silly when we can all look at a video of it…. What are you coming to come up with next? He’s some special superhuman that regular laws about standing in the street don’t apply to?

      • No dude, that’s his twin brother, Bruce. don’t be a racialist

      • Oh. Right. “Wink” That’s definetly not the same guy in the video as You all and your fun games. Oh the lengths some people go to.

      • yeah Bruce likes to support his twin brother by wearing a shirt with Thomas’s website address on it in case he appears in the media.


      • I am loving the way Guest is pretending to be a prosecuting attourney.  If anything, I think this clip demonstrates how the police were NOT arresting people and doing their best to not escalate the situation. One could easily argue that they could have begun arresting all of these folks, including me, right there on Liberty, but their goal was to get people to move to the park, and when I wastch this clip as well as the one I posted, what I see are officers listening to queers express their anger and seeking some resolution that didn’t include arrests. 

        I do not know if any of the Queers who were reluctant to leave Libery Ave were  of the folks who actually got arrested. Guess I’ll find out today if I get to the hearing.

        Always a pleasure to read your comments Guest. 

      • it’s most likely a 14 year old girl who thinks anarchy is cool

      • Strigiform says:

        You’re failing so hard TCW. Just give up already. Or maybe don’t Maybe the amount of bullshit stinking up your blog coming from you will help people understand how bullshit the rest is. Whoever Guest is is reasoning with you calmly and simply debating your idiotic posts and you’re all in a huff about repeatedly being proven wrong and being forced to acknowledge your own privilege and severe misunderstanding of the police. You’re so far behind you think you’re first.

      • I am continually amazed at how individuals who self identify as Queer and/or anarchist seem so caught up on power struggles. So amazing. First, behind- that sense of competition, as if it matters is all yours, not a mindset that means anything to me.

        And I’m not in a huff at all. I’m loving this.

      • Strigiform says:

        I’m loving how you showed up at that kangaroo court today where the cop flat out lied and the judge kept someone in jail with no evidence for who knows how many months and saw how that shit went down and still think that if you obey “the law” you’re safe, and that the cops care about people (outside of keeping them in jail), and so on. You got to see today the lengths they will go to to keep people imprisoned and you WONDER WHY WE’RE CAUGHT UP IN POWER STRUGGLES? Because there’s no other option. Duh.

      • Why did you just sit there and not provide evidence the police officer was lying? Duh.

      • I’m going to feed the troll for a moment and assume you really don’t know this: Preliminary hearings are for the prosecution to spout their case. They tried to bring witnesses for the defense and the attorney made an amazing case but the court would not allow witnesses until the trial. So the person is detained in jail until then which could be months. Guilty until proven less guilty. That’s the system.

      • Thomas Waters says:

        Everyone might want to step back and take a deep breath. OK?

        So, today’s hearing offereed no ability to refute the police’s statement, which I agree contained some inacuracies. I’m faily cluesless about court hearings, but things happen in some kinds of hearings and not others. I will be blogging about the court hearing this evening, so I won’t comment again in this thread, but I’m sure some folks will take exception to anything I say in that blog post too.

        OK, now another big breath.

        To be continued.

      • I like you TCW. Anyway, back on point. Look, the basic point of arguing with you here has nothing to do with our actual discussions, it has to do with the perceptions of those reading the comments. If this were a personal conversation I might be trying to change your views, but this is a public forum. When you state particular things that are then easily refuted and shown as untrue it damages your credibility and makes you appear foolish. As you’ve said there are a number of people who read this blog. So I guess if I’m a prosecuting attorney it is in the sense that I don’t let particular falsehoods you state simply pass. It’s worthwhile to do this in arguments because the people reading see you going through verbal contortions to not address specific points and other times simply attempting to change the subject. From your perspective I’m harping, but it’s a fairly standard practice when in a debate. No offense intended. I don’t think your a bad person or anything, but your argumentative skills are not conmensurate with the degree to which you try to construct and defend frames.

      • You make such attacks and yet do nothing to back up or support your premise. I write from my own perspective, please do the same. Or maybe that is your perspective…. and there is nothing to back it up. I have stated no falsehoods or inaccuracute things. Heck, you don’t even have the courage to represent yourself as a real person. Just an anonymous voice.

      • Actually, I moved around a bunch. I first walked over to where my partner was, and then back to where the reluctant to move queers were, then I went across the street and took a photo and then back to where the queers were. At one point I walked a short portion of the block towards the park and saw that somewhat of a crowd was there.

        I did intentionally stay back with the intention of catching the police on video if they acted inappropriately. It has been written in the comments here, that one officer assualted one of the queers. I didn’t see that, but what I did see showed the officers to act quite respectfully of these angry queers.

        As I have written, it is my personal opinion that later on, the police did not react and respond respectfully, but at this point, there on Liberty, I feel they were acting that way. Just my opinion based on my experience.

        As I’ve writen a bunch, if you feel you were mistreated or you saw the police mistreating anyone, FILE A COMPLAINT. They can’t be held accountable if no complaints are filed.