And actually, an identical IP address combined with immediate similarly worded responses is pretty good evidence of someone engaging in internet sock puppetry. People have gone to much greater lengths than switching email addresses to pretend there are more than one of them. Sounds paranoid, but I’ve seen people jump through lots of hoops to try to not look “wrong” on blogs, usenet, discussion boards, etc.

An example of your similarities: thinking I am angered by sock puppetry. Again, if I see things like that, I’ll point it out because it is dishonest and not in the spirit of open, honest discourse. And you “both” are way too sensitive and claim I engaged in name calling. As I see it, calling a spade a spade isn’t a bad thing. It looked like a duck, walked like a duck, and quacked like a duck… If I had called you an asshole for disagreeing with me, that would be another thing altogether.

On a lighter note regarding nasty hippies – from where I was, the tear gas really was only slightly more irritating than the all too common body odor.

My friend, in the spirit of good will, you need to relax a little. Why have a blog if you’re going to call people names who disagree with you? If you didn’t want public comment, why not keep a diary? So come on, lighten up, huh? Not cool to invite opinion and then yell at people. The “sock puppet” term is new to me, but I see how it would be annoying, but lord, you need more evidence than an IP address for that, huh?

‘Sides, a video of nasty hippie teens getting the poop gassed out of them should be a cause for celebration, not anger

Mike’s right, you an angry lil man! No cookie!

And yes, it is true if you are just on the street that you don’t need a permit – which is EXACTLY what many of the people involved were doing, no matter how many times you try to pretend otherwise.
The people who didn’t follow orders to leave were not doing anything wrong – except for not following orders to leave.

If “public safety” was really a concern, why did the police use weapons which indiscriminately do harm to everyone in the vicinity? LRAD in a densely populated residential area, for example. Tear gas onto balconies – does that really keep the community safe? Using that kind of force on people who were doing no harm to the community doesn’t exactly improve public safety.

But it is your choice. If you want to bleieve that police can do no wrong and they are not humans who can make bad decisions despite evidence to the contrary, that is up to you.

Hostility? Sorry if I hurt your feelings. There is nothing uncivil about calling someone out on deception. If you think that was “enraged”, you must have a hard time getting through the day without feeling like everyone is yelling at you. Annoyed, maybe. I find “anonymous” posting a little bothersome, but that’s life. Pretending that someone agrees with you through internet sock puppetry isn’t enraging, it is just kind of pathetic. If you don’t want to be called out on it, don’t do it. If you really are just sharing an internet connection, well, I guess you have a little idea of what it is like to be guilty of being a bystander.

Don’t let the web browser window hit you on the ass on the way out.

Look, I understand your point, though I disagree with it, and I thought it was a civil discussion, so your hostility has caught me a little off-guard.

That said, I’d like to, politely, correct you on one issue. You say, “We do not have to present papers to show we are permitted to be in public.” True if you are just walking down the street, but not true for protests or rallies. That’s covered under Pittsburgh city ordinance 16. You need a special-event permit if you want to stage a protest or what the ordinance calls a “First Amendment activity.” http://www.city.pittsburgh.pa.us/police/assets/special_events_permit/04_Ord_16_Special_Events.pdf

They didn’t have one, and so the police were well within their rights to do what they needed to do to ensure the safety of surrounding homes and businesses as well as to restore traffic. That means clearing the area, even of those who were not participating in the protest. The protesters had an opportunity to obtain a permit, which they ignored, and they had the opportunity to leave, which they ignored.

Again, the police tried their damnedest — for hours — to clear the area peacefully without using force, and as is clear from the videos, many ignored the warnings. So those that got “shot in the back” had ample, ample opportunity to leave before it came to that.

I’m sorry those from our IP address enraged you so, but I think we’ve learned our lesson and won’t be back.

Hey wait a minute – I just noticed your comment comes from the same IP address as the last comment did. Way to go, sock puppeteer. You must feel pretty weak about your statements if you have to pretend to be someone else who agrees with you. That’s kind of sad.

This was not a squad of rogue cops who started peppering people with bullets with no warning. They tried for several hours to disperse a crowd of people in the middle of the streets non-violently to no avail.

I do not see anything horrible or unbelievable about what the police were doing. If police officers order you to disperse and instead you sit around on a dorm balcony taking pictures, you’re a moron. Enjoy the tear gas.