Who wants to take a bet against the position that those "goons" who came to "support" in "solidarity" the workers of Cresta Roja come from groups with Kirchnerist sympathies, there to do what they could to cause a confrontation?
I'm surprised to have heard that blocking the lanes of public roads is actually against the law. As I posted previously with my experience, my conversation with the PFA cops that were at the first road block we encountered some 6 or so years ago in the north led me to believe it was written into the law. Maybe they had simply received instructions to allow it.
In the article EdRoomey linked to, the protesters felt they were told that opening up two lanes of traffic was enough to comply with the government's wishes, but I haven't seen any official indication that they were told that - in fact, Macri has stated at least once that I saw, and Michetti recently, that road blockages were not going to be tolerated. The protesters who said they were told keeping two lanes open was enough, I can't trust that. Not only that, traffic to Ezeiza without people blocking all but one lane each way can be quite bad at times. It still gives people who need to get to the airport, people who have spent hundreds or thousands of pesos to travel, an unfair hit that shouldn't happen because others are upset.
And in the same article, the account of who started the violence (as told by demonstrators themselves) sure seems different than the account given by RichardRPTownley who was watching events unfold, from the beginning it sounds like, on TV.
So Cristina's policies (or her henchmen's) created a huge problem with Cresta Roja to begin with - is it hard to believe that she and/or her henchmen would use this specific incident to force the government's hands? I find it easy to believe that Macri was upholding the law and giving short shrift to people who would punish travelers in general for their misfortune (and why - because they're rich if they're traveling by plane? I didn't see protestors blocking cabs and buses going to Retiro to take collectivos somewhere), as long as there is not some kind of law that guarantees people the right to blockade public roadways at their whim.
I would like to hear more from a non-interested party (i.e, someone I can trust to interpret the laws of Argentina and not try to interpret it to their own benefit as I've seen a certain lawyer do at times) related to the law with regards to what protesters are actually allowed to do when protesting. It makes a lot of sense to me that it is against the law to do so but that Cristina allowed it anyway rather than something written into law or constitution that allows a small group of people to affect literally tens of thousands of people, most of whom had nothing to do with Cresta Roja or any of the other injustices that various groups are protesting.
