Now breaking the windows at Whole Foods is not up there with the assassination of William McKinley, but it is not something you can expect police to ignore.
Of course police are always free to invent excuses for whatever they choose to do. They are less free to ignore the sort of thing BB was up to.
The conduct of the police -- what they do and decide not to do -- is a political decision. When you provide excuses for them to react, you are giving them political ammunition. A demonstration or occupation is a de facto statement in the public debate. There are ways to win this debate, and ways to lose it. The authorities may try to win the debate by using provocateurs. If you permit people to act in that role, whatever their motivations, you free the authorities from the need (and possible risk) of playing that card.
On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 10:21 AM, Carrol Cox <cbcox at ilstu.edu> wrote:
> Max Sawicky: . . .by provoking police
>
> The rest of your post is a reasonable position which may be debated
> reasonably. This phrase is lunacy. The police are never provoked unless
> they
> want to be provoked, and if they want to be, they will always find a
> provocation.
>
> Carrol
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>