Talk:NATO

SO much here is so backwards...please don't mind me, but I'm going to make some edits.Researcher 18:40, 20 November 2008 (EST)
 * Sure. This is wiki! Historian 18:41, 20 November 2008 (EST)

News stuff:
Owing to this being an article and not a news site, I've cut this here: {{quotebox|Nato is meeting in Chicago.

Chicago Alderman Rick Munoz said Tuesday legislation he plans to introduce on Wednesday prohibiting police from blocking access to social media and cell phone networks during the G8 and NATO summits in May, was intended to show that the city had a commitment to civil rights, and was not brought forth as a reaction to any intended police action.

The ordinance Munoz plans to introduce at today’s City Council meeting would also prohibit police from cooperating with any agency attempting to slow down, stop or monitor internet access to sites such as Twitter, Facebook, Flickr and MyTube.

Measures to restrict Internet access have been highlighted over the past year by the governments of Egypt and Tunisia, as well as in the U.S., where police last summer in San Francisco turned off power to cell phone towers to prevent those protesting against police brutality from communicating.

Munoz, who has been alderman of the 22nd ward in the Little Village neighborhood for the past 18 years, said the upcoming summits marked a chance for Chicago to showcase itself to the world both in its ability to hold a safe and peaceful event, while maintaining the freedoms that allow demonstrators to express their rights to free speech.

“Some of us were talking about the upcoming G8/NATO [protest] activities, and nobody was really looking at how these sorts of activities were being organized and nowadays they are being organized through social media and cell phones,” Munoz said. “Looking at what happened in San Francisco and some of the things that have happened around the world in terms of governments wanting to quell communication, we just figured it [the ordinance] would be a good way of basically saying this is Chicago, we want to showcase our respect the Constitution and for communication and we want to make sure that when it gets difficult that they don’t even consider it.”

May’s event marks the 38th year for the annual G8 summit, which has since 1975 brought together leaders of the world’s leading economies to discuss various global policies, including social and economic development, and has been the scene of violent clashes between police and demonstrators.

In anticipation, Mayor Rahm Emanuel in December announced a number of new security restrictions activists have criticized for being too suppressive, claiming they were designed to discourage mass demonstrations.

Under the mayor’s ordinance, gatherings in city parks and beaches are limited to Chicago Park District hours of operation from 6 a.m. to 11 p.m. Also, protesters are required to provide their very own parade marshal for every 100 people in attendance. Although fines for resisting arrest were not changed, increases were approved in fines for violation of the parade ordinance, with the minimum up from $50 to $200.

Further criticism of Emanuel’s regulations came after the mayor admitted that they would indeed become permanent, and not a temporary measure just for the summits as he once claimed.

Munoz, who voted in favor of the mayor’s security restrictions that passed in January, said concerns were voiced to Emanuel regarding some of the restrictions, and that some of the more extreme ones were taken out of the final ordinance.

“We raised some concerns to the Mayor’s office and we said some of this is way too much,” Munoz said, referring specifically to regulation requiring all marches held downtown to get $1 million in insurance coverage as well as assembly restrictions. “They raked some of those [restrictions] back and ultimately I voted in favor of it because we do want to make sure that this is a peaceful time and peaceful gathering – what I’m talking about is basically being able to put down a marker to make sure that the police and the authorities don’t prohibitively and preemptively suspend that kind of communication with social media and cell phones.”

When asked what kind of support he expected his proposal to get among his colleagues, Munoz simply said that’s what he would find out at Wednesday’s council meeting.

Top Concerns
1) The President has a different view of the Bosporous than most Europeans.

2) The use of chemical and radiation weapons against civilians especially by countries within the jurisdiction of Nato. The President has a different taste for chemicals than most civilians.

3) Exxon will be "renovating" a building in Chicago built in 1771 to put up a parking lot. Friends of Chicago feel strongly that such buildings should be protected from "renovation." Actually Chicago doesn't really have any history. The building is located somewhere else.

4) Penalties: If a civilian is harmed by a politician, the use of force by Nato against such politicians should be immediate and uncompromising.

5) Obama tried to serve unsuspecting people a chili dog melting pot made with artificial GMO produce. Everything is not delicious.

6) The jurisdiction of Nato should be limited.

7) Some of the water in Nato countries is impure.

8) Greece is getting really depressed.

9) British Railways and the IUCN are under attack.}} moral 15:14, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Hilarious fact-checking
I stumbled upon this rather counterproductive entry at euvsdisinfo.eu. I was thinking about adding it as a note after "treaty", but the beginning of the article seems to have already a good snark density, so I'm leaving details to registered users who may find this worth linking. The url contains the words "pending-check", so I guess some full fledged articles on the same site are less of a joke than this particular page.176.247.131.229 (talk) 22:18, 17 March 2022 (UTC)