UT Pro-Palestine Protest Thread

[wildcat09 29187]

This is what they brought the riot cops out for?

The way you know that this is what the cops really signed up for is that if it wasn't, they'd all be ashamed to be dressed like they're going into fucking Fallujah. 

[F250 28659]

6 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Rambo!  This is Lt. Clinton Morgan.  National Guard leader. 

 

[BabaYaga 15202]

Do what the employees at the Porsche plant in Germany did.  Eco-group broke in and glued their hands to the floor, so Porsche just ignored them wrapped up the day, turned off the lights and left.  Protestors who flummoxed, eventually needed the police because their hands were fucked from the glue and no bathrooms, and then tried to turn around and sue Porsche for "how they were treated".

Hopefully the case was laughed away into the trashcan.   

[BabaYaga 15202]

Hey guys, check out my feed, I'm trending.....

[InkaUtexas 25423]

CNN saying UT might close the campus. Um, right before finals? Over 50 people? What about the dorms? Um sorry, you have to move out.

Again, we did larger rallies for Students for Nader, the Latin American Students group, etc.

What have been planned is a sister protest at the LBJ, McCombs, etc. DPS would get lost and end up attacking UTPD.

[MonkeyDoughnut 10134]

It's the tents/encampment that's the issue right? I could see a slippery slope if tents are allowed to stay up where it got out of control quick.

[BabaYaga 15202]

2 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

CNN saying UT might close the campus. Um, right before finals? Over 50 people? What about the dorms? Um sorry, you have to move out.

Again, we did larger rallies for Students for Nader, the Latin American Students group, etc.

What have been planned is a sister protest at the LBJ, McCombs, etc. DPS would get lost and end up attacking UTPD.

For fucks sake

[YGIFS 19449]

1 minute ago, InkaUtexas said:

CNN saying UT might close the campus. Um, right before finals? Over 50 people? What about the dorms? Um sorry, you have to move out.

Again, we did larger rallies for Students for Nader, the Latin American Students group, etc.

What have been planned is a sister protest at the LBJ, McCombs, etc. DPS would get lost and end up attacking UTPD.

I know many folks consider all cops evil, but I've had encounters with UTPD twice in the past several days moving into/out of meetings in buildings that were on "lockdown."  And they have been very respectful, non-confrontational, and professional.  Obviously that could all change, but I found them both times to be wanting to show their presence but not be in anybody's space intimidating them.  DPS, on the other hand has been an absolute shitshow.  They are just rolling up the last 3 times looking to start shit like somebody's looting Dobie Mall or something.  completely unnecessary.  /rant 

[Pato del Muerto 52321]

3 minutes ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

It's the tents/encampment that's the issue right? I could see a slippery slope if tents are allowed to stay up where it got out of control quick.

Those are shade devices until they are used for overnight sleeping 

[BabaYaga 15202]

2 minutes ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

It's the tents/encampment that's the issue right? I could see a slippery slope if tents are allowed to stay up where it got out of control quick.

Then rope them off.  Here's your "space" and right to protest.  And when it's 90 and sunny, and you start to wilt like a fucking flower and your buddies no longer want to bring you starbucks and uber eats, then you can figure this out for yourself.  After a day or two, that group's going be rather "ripe"

[chainsaw 9831]

Damn some of you really hate having to see people express viewpoints you disagree with. "Rope them off?"

[Frank Drebin 5625]

 

 

[Brisketexan 104462]

7 minutes ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

It's the tents/encampment that's the issue right? I could see a slippery slope if tents are allowed to stay up where it got out of control quick.

It's not a slippery slope.  If the reasonable rule is "no overnight camping, including structures like tents," and overnight starts at 10:00 pm., then you tell the folks there that they're free to conduct their activities till 10, then they'll need to clear out.  And we're asking them to do it nicely.  Y'all can come back and do it all over again starting at 8:00 am tomorrow.

If it hits 10, and they aren't clearing out, then tell them one final time, then clear them out.

This shit isn't hard.  It's only hard if you want to go full-on fascist because you don't like their viewpoint.

[BabaYaga 15202]

1 minute ago, chainsaw said:

Damn some of you really hate having to see people express viewpoints you disagree with. "Rope them off?"

Jesus man, take the joke.  Give them their space but contain it and shut off the "slippery slope" argument before it can be thrown out.  Then just leave them alone.  They're not doing anything that should really bother anyone

[Brisketexan 104462]

Just now, Frank Drebin said:

 

 

They are correct.

You know who said so?  The Legislature and the Governor.  We the Motherfucking People.  It is a public space, they are allowed - by both a statute and the First Amendment - to peacefully assemble and express their views there, subject only to reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions like a curfew (no overnight camping).  That's the whole fucking point.  It IS "our lawn."  All of us. Which includes them.

[BabaYaga 15202]

1 minute ago, Frank Drebin said:

 

 

Please oh please oh please someone get @Armybrat to sit out  there with a sign that says "Get off" and have him raise it before each time they yell about the lawn

[hornbri 1367]

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

It's not a slippery slope.  If the reasonable rule is "no overnight camping, including structures like tents," and overnight starts at 10:00 pm., then you tell the folks there that they're free to conduct their activities till 10, then they'll need to clear out.  And we're asking them to do it nicely.  Y'all can come back and do it all over again starting at 8:00 am tomorrow.

If it hits 10, and they aren't clearing out, then tell them one final time, then clear them out.

This shit isn't hard.  It's only hard if you want to go full-on fascist because you don't like their viewpoint.

I agree - in this case the “reasonable rule” was no tents ever right? I mean i guess it can be debated if it was reasonable but everyone knew what the “red line” was going to be. 

I think it’s dumb and you should just let students protest, i would be curious if the people they are pulling out so far at the ones that were criminally trespassed (the non-students from last week). 

Edited April 29 by hornbri

[Frank Drebin 5625]

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

They are correct.

You know who said so?  The Legislature and the Governor.  We the Motherfucking People.  It is a public space, they are allowed - by both a statute and the First Amendment - to peacefully assemble and express their views there, subject only to reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions like a curfew (no overnight camping).  That's the whole fucking point.  It IS "our lawn."  All of us. Which includes them.

The University of Texas has articulated a list of other rules besides no overnight camping.  Including no tents.  And no masks.  Whether those are reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions will likely determine, in a court, the lawfulness of removing/arresting any of these individuals who are violating these rules.

Edited April 29 by Frank Drebin

[BabaYaga 15202]

1 minute ago, Frank Drebin said:

There are other rules besides no overnight camping.  Including no tents.  And no masks.  Whether those are reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions will likely determine, in a court, whether removing/arresting these individuals is lawful.

So now there is a rule that they "can't" wear masks?  Is that for identification purposes?  Not surgical masks, right?

[MonkeyDoughnut 10134]

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

It's not a slippery slope.  If the reasonable rule is "no overnight camping, including structures like tents," and overnight starts at 10:00 pm., then you tell the folks there that they're free to conduct their activities till 10, then they'll need to clear out.  And we're asking them to do it nicely.  Y'all can come back and do it all over again starting at 8:00 am tomorrow.

If it hits 10, and they aren't clearing out, then tell them one final time, then clear them out.

This shit isn't hard.  It's only hard if you want to go full-on fascist because you don't like their viewpoint.

The tents are against the rule at all time unless pre-approved: https://secure4.compliancebridge.com/utexas/public/getdoc.php?file=8-1050

In this case the tents are obviously being used to escalate the situation into more than a peaceful protest knowing they will get the police to show up to remove them.

[Skipper 6088]

Just now, hornbri said:

I agree - in this case the “reasonable rule” was no tents ever right? I mean i guess it can be debated if it was reasonable but everyone knew what the “red line” was goin got be. 

Right and let's not pretend if the rule was Brisket's "reasonable rule" of 10PM cut-off, then this same thing wouldn't be happening at 10PM.   They got what they wanted. 

[wildcat09 29187]

17 minutes ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

It's the tents/encampment that's the issue right? I could see a slippery slope if tents are allowed to stay up where it got out of control quick.

What is it with the sudden fear of tents? 

[Brisketexan 104462]

1 minute ago, wildcat09 said:

What is it with the sudden fear of tents? 

Well, from what I have learned from my reading of Surly, people will have sex in them.  Sex tents are the scourge of our time.

[Frank Drebin 5625]

2 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

So now there is a rule that they "can't" wear masks?  Is that for identification purposes?  Not surgical masks, right?

Plenty of courts have upheld a state actors right to prohibit masks or disguises in public spaces.  Some of the earliest cases were to prevent KKK members from wearing hoods to shield their identity and to make it difficult to identify lawbreakers among those lawfully protesting.

The University of Texas has said wearing masks in protests violates University policy.

https://www.texastribune.org/2024/04/24/ut-austin-israel-hamas-war-palestine-student-arrests/

[huge 3788]

I was going to ask what's with the masks?

DISGUISES???

[BabaYaga 15202]

Just now, Frank Drebin said:

Plenty of courts have upheld a state actors right to prohibit masks or disguises in public spaces.  Some of the earliest cases were to prevent KKK members from wearing hoods to shield their identity and to make it difficult to identify lawbreakers among those lawfully protesting.

The University of Texas has said wearing masks in protests violates University policy.

https://www.texastribune.org/2024/04/24/ut-austin-israel-hamas-war-palestine-student-arrests/

I wear a daily mask of decency and intelligence, but this boards knows otherwise.....

[mchookem 16094]

fascists don't do nuance

[InkaUtexas 25423]

Won't someone think about Halloween?

[Brisketexan 104462]

8 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

The University of Texas has articulated a list of other rules besides no overnight camping.  Including no tents.  And no masks.  Whether those are reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions will likely determine, in a court, the lawfulness of removing/arresting any of these individuals who are violating these rules.

Got it -- had not seen the strict "no tents, no masks" rules.  And yes, the challenge would have to be to those rules in particular.

The no masks/no concealing your identity is an interesting discussion.  I am surprised that our current leadership would put that in place, being that it would put some of their preferred groups at risk.  But then, I strongly suspect the policy will only be enforced when the State doesn't like the content of the speech.  That is, the rules are pretextual, and not applied in a content-neutral fashion.  We shall see.

[wildcat09 29187]

The repeated comparison of these protestors to klan members is a real top-tier Johnny Sack move.  Good to see you regaining some of your old form.

[BabaYaga 15202]

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Well, from what I have learned from my reading of Surly, people will have sex in them.  Sex tents are the scourge of our time.

Guys, guys, guys, if I stay here it's totally going to finally happen....

[Dahobbs 17420]

5 minutes ago, Skipper said:

Right and let's not pretend if the rule was Brisket's "reasonable rule" of 10PM cut-off, then this same thing wouldn't be happening at 10PM.   They got what they wanted. 

And the point has been that you can't arrest someone for a violation that hasn't actually occurred yet. Destroying a protest on the grounds that someone might violate a rule is fundamentally immoral and unconstitutional. 

[Skipper 6088]

2 minutes ago, huge said:

I was going to ask what's with the masks?

DISGUISES???

Guess they just wanted to find another rule to violate.  So edgy.  

[Frank Drebin 5625]

Just now, Brisketexan said:

Got it -- had not seen the strict "no tents, no masks" rules.  And yes, the challenge would have to be to those rules in particular.

The no masks/no concealing your identity is an interesting discussion.  I am surprised that our current leadership would put that in place, being that it would put some of their preferred groups at risk.  But then, I strongly suspect the policy will only be enforced when the State doesn't like the content of the speech.  That is, the rules are pretextual, and not applied in a content-neutral fashion.  We shall see.

If they can prove the regulations are not content neutral, then a court will strike them down.

[crash_davis 23078]

Fuck Abbott. Fuck DPS. Fuck these protesters. Fuck Israel. Fuck Hamas. Fuck everyone who's an asshole. So tired of everyone looking for reasons to be assholes.

If these fucking protests even hint at shutting down graduation, I'm going dress up in DPS gear and beat some motherfuckers.

[huge 3788]

Just now, crash_davis said:

Fuck Abbott. Fuck DPS. Fuck these protesters. Fuck Israel. Fuck Hamas. Fuck everyone who's an asshole. So tired of everyone looking for reasons to be assholes.

If these fucking protests even hint at shutting down graduation, I'm going dress up in DPS gear and beat some motherfuckers.

That's the spirit!

[Dahobbs 17420]

9 minutes ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

In this case the tents are obviously being used to escalate the situation into more than a peaceful protest knowing they will get the police to show up to remove them.

Wow. Today I learned that tents = escalatory. Gee, I would have thought the riot police and arrests last week were the escalating factor. But no, turns out, it is Coleman.

[Skipper 6088]

Just now, Dahobbs said:

And the point has been that you can't arrest someone for a violation that hasn't actually occurred yet. Destroying a protest on the grounds that someone might violate a rule is fundamentally immoral and unconstitutional. 

Well that wasn't actually the rule.  That was Brisket's interpretation of what a reasonable rule would be.  The actual rule (dating back to at least 2012 apparently) is no tents.  So the rule WAS violated.  Intentionally of course.  So they could escalate this shit for media attention.  

[Dahobbs 17420]

3 minutes ago, Skipper said:

Well that wasn't actually the rule.  That was Brisket's interpretation of what a reasonable rule would be.  The actual rule (dating back to at least 2012 apparently) is no tents.  So the rule WAS violated.  Intentionally of course.  So they could escalate this shit for media attention.  

It is pretty questionable whether "no tents" ever on a public forum is a reasonable restriction. More to the point, I've seen a photo of maybe 1 tent from last week. Enforcing the rule is removing the tent and maybe the person who put it up. Not kicking out everyone. I get that you don't like their speech. I get that you don't like these students. I don't get how you don't give a fuck about a pretty blatant and violent violation of civil rights. 

Edited April 29 by Dahobbs

[BabaYaga 15202]

They should have all first gone to Academy or REI, gotten a bunch of these mini-tents used to show what the full size looks like, and set them all up for the police to see.  Checkmate fuckers

[hornbri 1367]

5 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

It is pretty questionable whether "no tents" ever on a public forum is a reasonable restriction. More to the point, I've seen a photo of maybe 1 tent from last week. Enforcing the rule is removing the tent and maybe the person who put it up. Not kicking out everyone. I get that you don't like their speech. I get that you don't like these students. I don't get how you don't give a fuck about a pretty blatant and violent violation of civil rights. 

But we are talking about that happened today right? There were clear tents on campus today and it is clear they did that today to escalate the situation. Maybe now that tent question will get answered in court. 

Edited April 29 by hornbri

[MonkeyDoughnut 10134]

8 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Wow. Today I learned that tents = escalatory. Gee, I would have thought the riot police and arrests last week were the escalating factor. But no, turns out, it is Coleman.

 

5 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

It is pretty questionable whether "no tents" ever on a public forum is a reasonable restriction. More to the point, I've seen a photo of maybe 1 tent from last week. Enforcing the rule is removing the tent and maybe the person who put it up. Not kicking out everyone. I get that you don't like their speech. I get that you don't like these students. I don't get how you don't give a fuck about a pretty blatant and violent violation of civil rights. 

The protesters encircled the tents and chained tables together to protect the encampment. They knew exactly what they were doing. Credit to them as it worked exactly as they hoped it would.

[texashorne 1177]

2 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

They should have all first gone to Academy or REI, gotten a bunch of these mini-tents used to show what the full size looks like, and set them all up for the police to see.  Checkmate fuckers

What is this, a protest for ants? 

[BabaYaga 15202]

1 minute ago, texashorne said:

What is this, a protest for ants? 

God damn you.  That there, is funny

[crash_davis 23078]

2 minutes ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

 

The protesters encircled the tents and chained tables together to protect the encampment. They knew exactly what they were doing. Credit to them as it worked exactly as they hoped it would.

so...assholes. Fuck them.

I hope Abott and DPS unleash hell. And fuck them too.

[Skipper 6088]

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

 More to the point, I've seen a photo of maybe 1 tent from last week. Enforcing the rule is removing the tent and maybe the person who put it up. Not kicking out everyone. I get that you don't like their speech. I get that you don't like these students. I don't get how you don't give a fuck about a pretty blatant and violent violation of civil rights. 

Look at the picture from today dude.  They made a lame little tent city and encircled it locking arms.   They could have easily protested within the stated parameters and chose not to.  It was a fucking strategy.  At least see it for what it is.

[Foosters 17691]

5 minutes ago, hornbri said:

But we are talking about that happened today right? There were clear tents on campus today and it is clear they did that today to escalate the situation. Maybe now that tent question will get answered in court. 

fine, we'll get opaque tents

[mdmost 42775]

For all in tents and purposes?

[royiv 9131]

5 minutes ago, Skipper said:

Look at the picture from today dude.  They made a lame little tent city and encircled it locking arms.   They could have easily protested within the stated parameters and chose not to.  It was a fucking strategy.  At least see it for what it is.

You’re making a very good argument for just ignoring them.

[Smax 3799]

22 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Got it -- had not seen the strict "no tents, no masks" rules.  And yes, the challenge would have to be to those rules in particular.

The no masks/no concealing your identity is an interesting discussion.  I am surprised that our current leadership would put that in place, being that it would put some of their preferred groups at risk.  But then, I strongly suspect the policy will only be enforced when the State doesn't like the content of the speech.  That is, the rules are pretextual, and not applied in a content-neutral fashion.  We shall see.

 

Rules attached for you to look over 

 

Guess it's the capitalist in me but the university should go ahead and "grid off " spaces on the lawn like they do for tailgaters during football season and charge like $100 or whatever for a day pass. Whoever applies and gets the pass, make them sign a form acknowledging the rules and leave them be unless they start to break said rules