Supposed Military Abduction from G20

[Business_Casual]

Posted on Drudge:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8CNa_viKg0

Looks rather odd. Guys wearing BDUs and Multicam snatch and grab, while the riot gear'ed cops just stand there.

M_P

[Spooky130]

I call BS.

[Outlander Systems]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDtfKNRTY-Q

[Tweightwee]

I call BS.

Indeed. Dude has to be a police infil.
All the commies are wearing black and red.
He has blue trim so they can ID and "snatch" their recon guy back.
Looks like hes laughing as they shove him in the car.

[6933]

Looks to be fake. Dirty communists/stinky hippies can't even get a fake snatch and grab right. Looks like they spent their money hiring actors and buying the wrong camos. Less money they have to buy some tofu and the latest Kumbaya CD.

[Outlander Systems]

Why is it that all protesters are patchouli-stinkin', dope-smokin' college kids?

Here's how I know when I should be pissed off about something: When someone with a clue is riled up about it.

Take the town hall meetings. When Grandma and Grandpa are furious, it's time to take notice.

As well, if a restaurant is frequented by old folks it's either really cheap, or really REALLY good.

Just sayin'.

[R/Tdrvr]

Compare the G20 protests to the 9/12 "protests".

G20: Left wing loons and hippies trashing the city and inciting violence.

9/12: Peaceful demonstrators that cleaned up after themselves, and gave the police no trouble whatsoever. Yet, labled as right wing extremists, un-American, racists, whatever. :rolleyes:

[Business_Casual]

Here's why it should bother you: when the dope-smoking morons smash up a city over completely stupid, made-up grievances, the governments respond with this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAwmX5O-FAE

Does that look like the America in which you were raised? Yeah, I didn't think so.

M_P

[Outlander Systems]

Here's why it should bother you: when the dope-smoking morons smash up a city over completely stupid, made-up grievances, the governments respond with this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAwmX5O-FAE

Does that look like the America in which you were raised? Yeah, I didn't think so.

M_P

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

How to Defeat LRAD (http://www.peltor.com/peltor.com/comm_detail.cfm?prod_family=Comtac&ind_prod_num=MT15H68FB-08%20SV001)

[Outlander Systems]

I forgot, since The President is there, the standard rules for assembly do not apply. They're supposed to be in a Free-Speech Zone...

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_BYX14125JUQ/RxUozi0JLHI/AAAAAAAADqk/Q73OSGIk4og/s400/Free_Speech_Area.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/47/First_amendment_zone1.jpg

[Business_Casual]

The First Amendment stops well short of smashing windows and throwing fire bombs.

If they acted like adults, they would be treated like adults.

M_P

[Gutshot John]

Was anyone actually there? or are you just going on incomplete snippets of film? The whole "free speech zone" issue is entirely irrelevant. The incident wasn't filmed anywhere near the G20 complex/perimeter. It looks like Bloomfield/Lawrenceville where they had clashes with police yesterday. People live and work there and no G20 meetings within two miles.

The protesters were destroying property. The second video above shows the police "reading the riot act" and ordering the protesters to disperse as required by the law. They refused. The police then used non-lethal force (LRAD) to disperse the crowd and make arrests. The "snatch and grab" looks equally dubious.

I'm all for the right of protest, but your right to protest ends where it conflicts with my right to go to work or go about my life. The arrogance of these people that come to my town and think they can destroy property and somehow equate violence with "free speech" or dissent (while wearing masks to protect their identity) is pure thuggery.

Mess with the bull...you get the horns. Tough titties.

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

That 'abduction' looked like a training tape to me. Can someone familiar with Philly confirm that this is actually shot there?

Yeah, do a illegal grab job and not even wear glasses?

[Outlander Systems]

The First Amendment stops well short of smashing windows and throwing fire bombs.

If they acted like adults, they would be treated like adults.

M_P

That's why I put "peaceably" in italics.

:D

I'm still trying to determine what, exactly, they're protesting. And what, exactly, throwing firebombs and breaking shit accomplishes.

On top of that, I don't give brainwashed hippies in the 18-22 demographic any credence whatsoever. Their battles are imagined, their struggles irrelevant, and their methods of expressing their voices is self-defeating.

They need to go home and rethink their lives. And if they truly wanted to make a difference, they need to get their asses to the nearest polling place, come next election.

ETA: John - I noticed that too. If they were behaving in a civilised manner, what's up with the masks? Pretty much underscores the intent here, doesn't it?

[Erik 1]

Was anyone actually there? or are you just going on incomplete snippets of film? The whole "free speech zone" issue is entirely irrelevant. The incident wasn't filmed anywhere near the G20 complex/perimeter. It looks like Bloomfield/Lawrenceville where they had clashes with police yesterday. People live and work there and no G20 meetings within two miles.

The protesters were destroying property. The second video above shows the police "reading the riot act" and ordering the protesters to disperse as required by the law. They refused. The police then used non-lethal force (LRAD) to disperse the crowd and make arrests. The "snatch and grab" looks equally dubious.

I'm all for the right of protest, but your right to protest ends where it conflicts with my right to go to work or go about my life. The arrogance of these people that come to my town and think they can destroy property and somehow equate violence with "free speech" or dissent (while wearing masks to protect their identity) is pure thuggery.

Mess with the bull...you get the horns. Tough titties.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9f/Birmingham_campaign_water_hoses.jpg

[Gutshot John]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9f/Birmingham_campaign_water_hoses.jpg

Really? That's the comparison you're going to make? You think these people are non-violent civil rights protesters? I don't recall them breaking store-fronts etc, but even still there's a world of difference between the two. Honestly the comparison cheapens the Birmingham protests, but historically the comparison is deeply, deeply flawed.

Why stop there? Why not just go straight to calling the cops Nazi Stormtroopers and get it over with?

Please.

[Erik 1]

I'm fairly sure the civil rights protesters interfered with more than a few people trying to get to work. Beyond that, no I'm not going to compare the two. I don't happen to agree with the tactics of the G20 protestors. I do, however, support the concept even if it interferes with you, or me, getting to and from work or whatever.

[Gutshot John]

I'm fairly sure the civil rights protesters interfered with more than a few people trying to get to work.

Actually no, the civil rights protesters engaged only in a boycott and were VERY conscious of being NON-VIOLENT. Check MLK jr. on google.

If it was simply that, I'd deal, in fact the whole city has shut down and people are working from home. That these people have engaged in destruction of property alone justifies police actions.


Beyond that, no I'm not going to compare the two.

Really? Then why post the picture with no other commentary if not implicitly comparing the two?


I don't happen to agree with the tactics of the G20 protestors. I do, however, support the concept even if it interferes with you, or me, getting to and from work or whatever.

You're of course free to believe that, great country we live in no? Too bad those idiots can't fathom that western democracy and capitalism have given them those rights and a tolerance for their idiocy.

Of course that's the law and virtually the whole city agrees with you since it has shut down resulting in the loss of productivity even if it did give my wife a 5 day weekend. That said that right does not extend to having an excuse to destroy property.

[Zhurdan]

I'm fairly sure the civil rights protesters interfered with more than a few people trying to get to work. Beyond that, no I'm not going to compare the two. I don't happen to agree with the tactics of the G20 protestors. I do, however, support the concept even if it interferes with you, or me, getting to and from work or whatever.

What about when they are blocking emergency vehicles that you called to your location? Still don't see a need for some semblance of order? Having a place to protest is a result if idiotic behavior in the past. It's been shown time and time again that some groups will bash and smash the area. In order to still "allow" them to protest while maintaining the protection of personal property... well, it's put everyone into a free speech zone. So it's "fair" to everyone. Even though it's the idiots that put everyone there, those same idiots won't obey the rules so why does it even really matter? Act like an idiot... get treated like one.

(and I think posting the civil rights/water cannon photo was in poor taste. It's not even remotely the same situation)

[Gutshot John]

What about when they are blocking emergency vehicles that you called to your location? Still don't see a need for some semblance of order? Having a place to protest is a result if idiotic behavior in the past. It's been shown time and time again that some groups will bash and smash the area. In order to still "allow" them to protest while maintaining the protection of personal property... well, it's put everyone into a free speech zone. So it's "fair" to everyone. Even though it's the idiots that put everyone there, those same idiots won't obey the rules so why does it even really matter? Act like an idiot... get treated like one.

(and I think posting the civil rights/water cannon photo was in poor taste. It's not even remotely the same situation)


Sheesh, there you go, using common sense and logic to make a point.

You should be ashamed of yourself. ;)

[Business_Casual]

The only valid comparison between the civil rights protests and the G20 is that Democrats are involved in each one. In the former, ordering the water cannons and dogs out, if you'll recall your history.

M_P

[Outlander Systems]

The poor behaviour on the part of the protesters is the very reason the Free Speech Zones had to be created in the first place.

They're anarchists, plain and simple. I'd love to see how their beliefs hold up, if FEMA brings them water during an emergency.

Seriously, I'm all for the 1A, but these assclowns aren't there to talk or voice an opinion. I saw one video where they described themselves as anarchists AND communists. :rolleyes:

Get real, they need to be back on their meds. They're not fighting for civil rights. Once they started busting and smashing, they became domestic terrorists.

[6933]

Eric1- Weren't you the one being abducted?

[Erik 1]

We're free to disagree, aren't we, because it is a great country. I think condemning the whole group as a bunch of stinky, idiotic hippies is in poor taste. I think comments like "mess with the bull, get the horns" are simplistic at best and make the poster, whatver he may really think, sound an awful lot like somebody who would turn a firehose on a group of peaceful protestors. I think the parallels between the civil rights movement, which encompassed quite a bit more in the way of action than boycotting of businesses, and today's protestors on whatever subject, are real. MLK Jr. was not the only guy out there. And no, I don't condone the destruction of property. Who said anything about not seeing the need for some semblance of order?

[Erik 1]

Eric1- Weren't you the one being abducted?

Crap. The mask slipped?

[rmecapn]

Why stop there? Why not just go straight to calling the cops Nazi Stormtroopers and get it over with?

Peaceably protesting does not always result in the benign behavior of the agents of our government in controlling such protests. Our government and their agents are capable of all sorts of interesting behavior when provided the right incentive and propaganda. The Bonus March of 1932 is an excellent example. So is the Kent State shootings in 1970. Or, if you want to stretch it a bit more, Waco and Ruby Ridge.

I am convinced, that before all this is over, that government agents will kill one or more tea party goers. They will be convinced, just as Macarthur was in 1932, that they represent some threat to the security of the nation. This administration understands full well what is required to set those conditions. The DHS report earlier this year and the constant marginilization and demonization by the press and administration of tea party goers is but a part of that plan. It is the goal to make tea party participants look as threatening as the G20 protesters. Do not delude yourself. This administration is cunning and ruthless.

[Outlander Systems]

Peaceably protesting does not always result in the benign behavior of the agents of our government in controlling such protests. Our government and their agents are capable of all sorts of interesting behavior when provided the right incentive and propaganda. The Bonus March of 1932 is an excellent example. So is the Kent State shootings in 1970. Or, if you want to stretch it a bit more, Waco and Ruby Ridge.

I am convinced, that before all this is over, that government agents will kill one or more tea party goers. They will be convinced, just as Macarthur was in 1932, that they represent some threat to the security of the nation. This administration understands full well what is required to set those conditions. The DHS report earlier this year and the constant marginilization and demonization by the press and administration of tea party goers is but a part of that plan. It is the goal to make tea party participants look as threatening as the G20 protesters. Do not delude yourself. This administration is cunning and ruthless.

I didn't think the TEA protesters were acting out of line at any of their gatherings.

Short of a lone nutter, or Agent Provocateur, I don't see this happening. Or is it that I simply don't want to see this happening?

[Gutshot John]

We're free to disagree, aren't we, because it is a great country. I think condemning the whole group as a bunch of stinky, idiotic hippies is in poor taste. I think comments like "mess with the bull, get the horns" are simplistic at best and make the poster, whatver he may really think, sound an awful lot like somebody who would turn a firehose on a group of peaceful protestors.

Horsepuckey, you're doing your best to miss the point. We're not talking about peaceful protesters.

This city has gone out of its way to play host to these morons and accommodate their protests. The least they can do is behave themselves. When you're a guest in my house, I expect you to behave yourself. If you come to this city and bust shit up, you can't expect the locals to be sympathetic or even grateful. They expect the police to do their jobs and stop it.

I'll say it again...mess with the bull, get the horns.

[Gutshot John]

Peaceably protesting does not always result in the benign behavior of the agents of our government in controlling such protests.

Once again, peaceful protests may be inconvenient, but certainly proof that this country still values liberty.

We're not talking about peaceful protests. I've yet to see a Tea Party protest turn violent and destroy private property. I've also yet to see anyone wear a mask to hide their identity.

Again I see no valid comparison between the two.

[Mac5.56]

Why is it that all protesters are patchouli-stinkin', dope-smokin' college kids?

Here's how I know when I should be pissed off about something: When someone with a clue is riled up about it.

Take the town hall meetings. When Grandma and Grandpa are furious, it's time to take notice.

As well, if a restaurant is frequented by old folks it's either really cheap, or really REALLY good.

Just sayin'.

How dare you Landlord! Don't speak any sort of sense when it comes to generalizations, and gross over statements on here.

[Outlander Systems]

Lets put it into perspective.

You decide to have your shooting buddies come over to your house. The local gun-haters get pissed, that you slimy, greasy, violent bastards are having a cookout at your crib. So, they decide to protest your cookout. They show up at your doorstep, and demand that you disband your gathering, and destroy your firearms. You do not comply, and they begin to throw rocks at your house, and your neighbors' houses, and smash your mailbox. They turn over your garbage cans, and light the cat on fire.

I can't speak for you, but I'd want the local PD to bring out the heavy artillery, and dish out an ass-whippin.

Just sayin'.

[Mac5.56]

I am convinced, that before all this is over, that government agents will kill one or more tea party goers. They will be convinced, just as Macarthur was in 1932, that they represent some threat to the security of the nation.

Don't take offense to this but you are absolutely out of touch with reality if you think this! It will never, ever, happen if the tone of the "Tea Parties" stays the way that it has. The worst that this movement is going to suffer is some potential taser hits, bean bag shot guns, and maybe some CS gas.

Let me just put it this way: If no one was killed at the WTO in Seattle, or for that matter the WTO in Mexico, there is no way your thought process fits into line with historical events regarding the use of force by Western Governments in protest situations. In fact the only death that has happened in the last ten years that was a result of police action was an Italian Anarchist at the G8 in Italy in 2001. The death was a result of a complete and absolute break down of all order on the part of both the police officers and the protesters. If you have seen footage it was literally like a primitive war being fought between protesters and police officers, a literal war. The kid that was killed was in the process of trying to climb onto and take control of a police vehicle. He was shot in the head.

Your Tea Party protests are nothing even remotely close to this. Not only are you jumping to ridiculous conclusions about several aspects of your movement, and the governments response to it, but you are also not taking into consideration the amount of training, and practice the police forces of this nation have when it comes to the use of non lethal dispersal techniques. Sorry but your idea of a tea party martyr just isn't going to happen.

[Erik 1]

Horsepuckey, you're doing your best to miss the point. We're not talking about peaceful protesters.

This city has gone out of its way to play host to these morons and accommodate their protests. The least they can do is behave themselves. When you're a guest in my house, I expect you to behave yourself. If you come to this city and bust shit up, you can't expect the locals to be sympathetic or even grateful. They expect the police to do their jobs and stop it.

I'll say it again...mess with the bull, get the horns.

I really do get your point. I'm fully capable of missing it (even without doing my best to do so), but in this case, I'm not. Again, I don't condone destruction of property as a form of protest. I don't object to police action in response. MY point is that you make yourself sound like a goon when you talk that way.

[6933]

Landlord- They'd be wearing masks so I would feel I also had a right to cover up my identity. Why be out in the open when you consider your actions correct? So, I would put on a mask, walk over to your house, and start beating some sissy ass. If they destroy property and smash things up, then they should be willing to accept the consequences. If I smashed sh** up, I wouldn't complain if someone caught me and was able to smash me up. I mean, they mask up and do what they feel is proper, so why can't I? Then, I'd run home, unmask, and come have a beer with you while we watched the police toss them in the wagon. Wait a minute, I'd also have to shower to get the liberal/hippie/commie/anarchist stink off of me. Probably get one of the cute chicks to wash me down. Happy ending, maybe?

[Business_Casual]

light the cat on fire.



That, sir, is where I draw the line.

M_P

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

I know that they put the cops in Black riot gear to make them look more authoritarian and in control, but sometimes I think that the police would be better served if they were dressed in pastel colors. The all black looks horrible in the pics that shown around the world, and the protestors aren't intimiated by it.

[Gutshot John]

MY point is that you make yourself sound like a goon when you talk that way.

Only if you don't understand what the idiom means. The point is that if you f*&k with people's livelihoods and communities, they're going to expect law enforcement to address the issue. Don't cry about police "repression" when you're breaking the law.

Funny that most of the locals I know (even a few liberal dems) have used far more colorful metaphors, so perhaps we are a city of goons. Somehow I doubt it, but in general I don't care what you or others think. I've no patience for their bullshit.

My favorite sign? "Support anarchy...Smack an anarchist".

[Gutshot John]

I know that they put the cops in Black riot gear to make them look more authoritarian and in control, but sometimes I think that the police would be better served if they were dressed in pastel colors. The all black looks horrible in the pics that shown around the world, and the protestors aren't intimiated by it.

Actually they tried that once. 1972 Munich Olympics. We all know what happened next.

[6933]

ColdDead-I don't mean this as an as**ole: Who cares what the world thinks? That is one of the problems many libs have. They what to pander to world opinion.

Like your idea of pastel colors. How great would it be to see a hippie get beat down by a guy in pink and purple? Hell, maybe put a skirt on 'em for psy effect. It would be all the rage at the spring fashion shows. Black and blue covered in pink and purple.

[Erik 1]

Only if you don't understand what the idiom means. The point is that if you f*&k with people's livelihoods and communities, they're going to expect law enforcement to address the issue. Don't cry about police "repression" when you're breaking the law.



Well, now we're back to those civil rights protestors. They were f!cking with people's livelihoods and breaking the law too. Of course, those were bad laws, weren't they.

[Gutshot John]

Well, now we're back to those civil rights protestors. They were f!cking with people's livelihoods and breaking the law too. Of course, those were bad laws, weren't they.

Like I said, you're doing your best to miss the point. Laws against the destruction of private property aren't "bad." A boycott is NOT destruction of private property or livelihood. They're of course free not to shop at the stores they disagree with; however destroying that property is a crime.

Any subsequent moral or legal comparison to the civil rights movement is specious at best.

[Erik 1]

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this.

[Gutshot John]

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this.

You don't agree that destruction of private property and mob violence is a crime?

[Erik 1]

Now who's trying their best to miss the point? I mean really, go back and read my posts.

[Gutshot John]

Now who's trying their best to miss the point? I mean really, go back and read my posts.

Really, so what's your problem with the police doing their jobs?

Repeatedly I've said that those that engage in violence against the community should be addressed by law enforcement. If you throw rocks at cops and destroy private property don't be surprised if you get tuned up and arrested.

The first post didn't have anything to say, only a picture. Subsequent to that you've only stated that peaceful protests are permitted, which I've never denied. Comparing these people to the civil rights movement is a huge stretch.

[khc3]

what's with all the lefty newbies?

[rmecapn]

Sorry but your idea of a tea party martyr just isn't going to happen.

Really?! Then why the demonization and maginalization? Why the DHS and Missouri reports? Why the refrence to violent behavior by the likes of Pelosi and the MSM? Why the characterization as militant because a couple of folks show up with firearms?

Like you said, I'm just out of touch with reality. And yeah, I'm well aware of the training government agents receive. Believe me, I prepare accordingly.

[Erik 1]

Gutshot: Go back and find one post where I said I have a problem with the police doing their job. To be clear, and I think I have, I was commenting on how you and others sound when you start talking about how the hippie dirtbags deserve what they get. You make yourselves sound like a bunch of jackbooted thugs. Part of the reason that bothers me is because I'm quite sure that you, and most people on the board, are good, decent people who's company I'd enjoy and who's politics I agree with more than not. I also think there is real danger in that kind of de-humanized perspective on an entire group of people. Comparing the G-20 protestors to the civil rights movement may be a huge stretch in your view, but not so much in mine. Each group thinks/thought they're serving a good and valid purpose. You agree with one group's purpose, disagree with another's. The same language can be used about each, and the same justifications for putting them down. You don't have to agree with my views on this specific subject, however I'm not about to agree with your's either.

[Gutshot John]

Really?! Then why the demonization and maginalization? Why the DHS and Missouri reports? Why the refrence to violent behavior by the likes of Pelosi and the MSM? Why the characterization as militant because a couple of folks show up with firearms?

Like you said, I'm just out of touch with reality. And yeah, I'm well aware of the training government agents receive. Believe me, I prepare accordingly.

To be clear, I don't deny that what you say could happen, but it hasn't happened yet.

However if it does happen and the hypothetical victim has engaged in violence then they will no longer be a martyr.

If the victim is behaving in a peaceful manner and is gunned down as a "militant" it will be a whole other ball of wax.

[Business_Casual]

Gutshot: Go back and find one post where I said I have a problem with the police doing their job. To be clear, and I think I have, I was commenting on how you and others sound when you start talking about how the hippie dirtbags deserve what they get. You make yourselves sound like a bunch of jackbooted thugs. Part of the reason that bothers me is because I'm quite sure that you, and most people on the board, are good, decent people who's company I'd enjoy and who's politics I agree with more than not. I also think there is real danger in that kind of de-humanized perspective on an entire group of people. Comparing the G-20 protestors to the civil rights movement may be a huge stretch in your view, but not so much in mine. Each group thinks/thought they're serving a good and valid purpose. You agree with one group's purpose, disagree with another's. The same language can be used about each, and the same justifications for putting them down. You don't have to agree with my views on this specific subject, however I'm not about to agree with your's either.

I wasn't going to bother, because once old Johnnie jumps in, a thread usually goes straight to shit. However, I do take exception to the idea that "Each group thinks/thought they're serving a good and valid purpose."

Not good enough. History is littered with good intentions. The Salem Witch Trials, the Spanish Inquisition, Removal of the Kulaks and on and on. Just because the Son of Sam thought he was doing the right thing doesn't mean he was.

M_P

[Gutshot John]

Gutshot: Go back and find one post where I said I have a problem with the police doing their job. To be clear, and I think I have, I was commenting on how you and others sound when you start talking about how the hippie dirtbags deserve what they get.

Fair enough, in return go back and find one post where I used the term "hippie dirtbag". In fact I went out of my way to distinguish between peaceful protesters and violent ones.


Each group thinks/thought they're serving a good and valid purpose. You agree with one group's purpose, disagree with another's. The same language can be used about each, and the same justifications for putting them down. You don't have to agree with my views on this specific subject, however I'm not about to agree with your's either.

I don't care what they think/feel. The facts don't support the comparison. In the case of segregation people's liberties were being curtailed despite legislation and constitutional amendments. Those people engaged in PEACEFUL protests such as boycotts to gain rights they were denied. These protests have NADA to do with being denied their constitutional rights NOR are there rights being infringed. There is no right to be violent, in fact quite the opposite.

That the G-20 protesters have every right to protest is tautological proof that there is no repression. No one in Pittsburgh, who lives and works in these neighborhoods, has anything at all to do with whatever it is they dislike. As such they certainly don't have a right to engage in violence against the community.

[Gutshot John]

I wasn't going to bother, because once old Johnnie jumps in, a thread usually goes straight to shit.

A thread usually goes to shit when someone makes an asinine statement such as the above. Invariably it comes from a pot calling a kettle black.

That said you still haven't put me on ignore yet after threatening to how many times? That you haven't kind of discredits your above statement. Honestly, do us both a favor if you're just going to act like a jerk.

[Erik 1]

I wasn't going to bother, because once old Johnnie jumps in, a thread usually goes straight to shit. However, I do take exception to the idea that "Each group thinks/thought they're serving a good and valid purpose."

Not good enough. History is littered with good intentions. The Salem Witch Trials, the Spanish Inquisition, Removal of the Kulaks and on and on. Just because the Son of Sam thought he was doing the right thing doesn't mean he was.

M_P

That's a good point, and I agree. Please read it with the next sentence, though: "You agree with one group's purpose, disagree with another's."

I'm not suggesting that thinking you're doing good is enough justification for an action. Not by a long shot. Rather, that agreeing or disagreeing with the purpose seems to be what drives whether or not one condones or condemns the action.

[Mac5.56]

Really?! Then why the demonization and maginalization? Why the DHS and Missouri reports? Why the refrence to violent behavior by the likes of Pelosi and the MSM? Why the characterization as militant because a couple of folks show up with firearms?

Like you said, I'm just out of touch with reality. And yeah, I'm well aware of the training government agents receive. Believe me, I prepare accordingly.

You completely missed the historical context of what I was saying, and decided rather to focus on the negative press your movement is receiving in order to justify your belief. All of your examples don't change what I am saying in the least. All they are are examples that justify your fear, while it's true that there are probably negative feelings towards your movement, and I can pretty much promise you that the FBI and other government agents are watching you, and collecting data, it doesn't mean that someone is going to get killed! In fact, the government would be absolutely stupid to do that, and if you think they haven't learned after your earlier examples provided (Kent State, the 1930's Labor Movement, ext) your wrong.

Less than lethal suppression of public protests rarely makes the news, causes less negative feedback within non decided members of a community, and results in less paper work and after action bureaucracy. Thus it is a more effective tactic in breaking up social movements (whether they are left or right).

I realize you are feeling a lot of excitement and passion about the movement you are currently involved in, I realize you guys are getting a massive reaction both from the government, and the media. But it's not "the revolution", and it doesn't mean that the black helicopters and government death squads are waiting around the corner.

Need an example? Use all of the ones I posted in my earlier post, then, add the fact that the political group that was primarily blamed for the violence at the 1999 WTO is actually on the FBI's most wanted list of domestic terrorists. These groups still protest all the time in the Pacific North West, and around the world. I bet some of them are at the G20 right now. They're on the top wanted list of political activist groups in the country. None of them have been killed by your government. All of them fit the context that would justify violence by the state using the standards you are applying to your group. None of them have been killed, many however have gone to jail, for a very very long time. This is why I say your are out of touch with reality, because in fact you are.

[Mac5.56]

I wasn't going to bother, because once old Johnnie jumps in, a thread usually goes straight to shit. However, I do take exception to the idea that "Each group thinks/thought they're serving a good and valid purpose."

Not good enough. History is littered with good intentions. The Salem Witch Trials, the Spanish Inquisition, Removal of the Kulaks and on and on. Just because the Son of Sam thought he was doing the right thing doesn't mean he was.

M_P

Thank you for this, and once we realize it includes all sides of the political spectrum as well, then we can start figuring out how to move forward as a society.

[Erik 1]

Fair enough, in return go back and find one post where I used the term "hippie dirtbag". In fact I went out of my way to distinguish between peaceful protesters and violent ones.

Fair enough.




I don't care what they think/feel. The facts don't support the comparison. In the case of segregation people's liberties were being curtailed despite legislation and constitutional amendments. Those people engaged in PEACEFUL protests such as boycotts to gain rights they were denied. These protests have NADA to do with being denied their constitutional rights NOR are there rights being infringed. There is no right to be violent, in fact quite the opposite.

That the G-20 protesters have every right to protest is tautological proof that there is no repression. No one in Pittsburgh, who lives and works in these neighborhoods, has anything at all to do with whatever it is they dislike. As such they certainly don't have a right to engage in violence against the community.

Again, I agree that they don't have the right to engage in violence against the community.

[6933]

General statement not aimed at anyone-60's civil rights movement wasn't this peaceful, loving movement many portray it to be. Black Panthers-violent. Weather Underground(one of their core beliefs was black liberation)-violent. Crown Heights riots, Cincinnati riots, Watts riots, etc. W.E.B. DuBois, founder of the NAACP condoned violence. Phillip Randolph, founder of the first MOWM, advocated violence. There were many, many protests that had violence instigated by the protesters. Other groups, such as Black Muslims, also advocated violence, and perpetuated it. H. Rap Brown pressed for violence and was violent. Stokely Carmichael, et al. The civil rights movement was anything but based on non-violence.

Let the protesters be violent. But don't cry foul when violence is met with violence.

[rmecapn]

your movement

My movement?


the government would be absolutely stupid to do that

They most certainly are stupid. There are several thousand of my brothers lying in graves to prove it.


I realize you are feeling a lot of excitement and passion about the movement you are currently involved in, I realize you guys are getting a massive reaction both from the government, and the media. But it's not "the revolution", and it doesn't mean that the black helicopters and government death squads are waiting around the corner.

Since you come across as some sort of intellectual elitist, I'll expect that you completely understand how condescending that statement is and it is what you intended.


your government

So, just where on the planet do you come from o' reasoned one?

[rmecapn]

To be clear, I don't deny that what you say could happen, but it hasn't happened yet.

And I didn't ever expect to make every point on some DHS extremist watch list, but I did.


However if it does happen and the hypothetical victim has engaged in violence then they will no longer be a martyr.

What violent acts were the Bonus Marchers engaged in? What violent acts were the students at Kent State engaged in?

What happens when this adminstration's policies on boarder control allow for a terrorist to get through and set off some type of MWD? Martial law, maybe? What happens when you take to the streets, peaceably, to protest the unconstitutionality of such a move? I spent enough time in uniform to know you can get LE and mil to follow even the most unconstitutional order, given the right condition.


If the victim is behaving in a peaceful manner and is gunned down as a "militant" it will be a whole other ball of wax.

It won't matter, because the state will insist it was a legit shoot. And I can assure you, the trigger puller will feel the same way.

I do not believe in the benevolence of this or any other government. Contrary to popular belief, there is historical precedence for me to feel that way.

[Mac5.56]

My movement?



They most certainly are stupid. There are several thousand of my brothers lying in graves to prove it.



Since you come across as some sort of intellectual elitist, I'll expect that you completely understand how condescending that statement is and it is what you intended.



So, just where on the planet do you come from o' reasoned one?

Look man rational thought is not elitism. I apologize if I came off as elitist, that wasn't my intention, but I have noticed that your not addressing the points I'm making, just picking apart areas where I sound rude. That's fair, that's my fault in the way I worded what I did, but it doesn't change what I am saying.

And yea I think it is pretty interesting how every social movement thinks it will be the one to bring on the next grand revolution. I also think it has a lot to do with people's passions being elevated do the excitement of being involved in a social movement.

As for the "your government", it is your government isn't it? It's also mine, and I should have made that clear.

edited to add:

I am not disagreeing with a lot of your observations on the part of the way in which the federal government and local governments have a tendency to trample on people's civil liberties when it comes to peaceful assembly. In fact, you may find that we agree more then we disagree. The only thing I am saying is that you will not see a physical death at the hands of the state as a result of this Tea Party Movement, it's just not going to happen. Unless of course they shoot first.

[RogerinTPA]

I call BS.

Ditto. Looks like a prank.

My question is, why doesn't the LEOs use those giant, fire extinguisher type, pepper spray dispensers on those ass wipes?

[FlyAndFight]

...
And yea I think it is pretty interesting how every social movement thinks it will be the one to bring on the next grand revolution.

Curious. I've never thought of the Tea Party demonstrations as being some type of "grand revolution" bringing movement. All they appear to be doing is peaceably expressing their discontent with the current administration's fiscal policies.

[Voodoochild]

Gentlemen I urge you all to take a deep breath and relax. This thread has gotten a little out of hand and I can see a few of you getting hot under the collar. So everyone calm down before I lock this thread and start taking a ruler to your hands.

[QuietShootr]

what's with all the lefty newbies?

Was wondering that myself.

[rmecapn]

As for the "your government", it is your government isn't it?

Am I a citizen? Yes. Am I represented by this adminstration and the congress? No. In fact, a NCO with USASOCOM stated it best:

The results of the polling in this country have told me everything that I need to know about half of my "fellow" countrymen.

They are now my enemy and I see zero difference between them and an Al Qaeda operative when it comes to changing this country for the worse.

It’s not about Obama anymore. It’s about a shift in how some Americans think about what America should be. In the end, this change in philosophy can only be settled with the bayonet.

But nasty things like revolution are best whispered in hushed tones in private and not splattered all over the airwaves or internet, so I try to refrain from such crazy talk.


The level of disenfranchisement expressed in that quote goes right to the heart of the issue. There is *alot* of emotion involved in what's going on here, on both sides. I do not believe a "revolution" will occur. I do see a civil war on the horizon.


The only thing I am saying is that you will not see a physical death at the hands of the state as a result of this Tea Party Movement, it's just not going to happen. Unless of course they shoot first.

And as I tried to indicate above, I don't think you truly appreciate the level of "dissatisifaction" that is building. As for addressing your arguments, I would suggest that the protesters at the WTO in Seattle were no current threat to the power of the existing administration at the time. They were a sideshow, much as the G20 protesters are. The 9/12 March was no sideshow. The administration has had to react to the pressure from that "movement". They've lost people (i.e. Van Jones) and organizations (i.e. ACORN) to that movement. It is a direct threat to it's power. When power is threatened, choices are made that may not be reasonable or rational. I trust them not.

[Voodoochild]

I told you I would lock it and I am doing just that. If you want a civilized discussion then do just that. Anymore nonsense like this and I will start passing out infractions....PERIOD!!!!