Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Sundowner on February 17, 2008, 07:20:37 PM
-
Any questions?
(caution:some objectionable language)
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19347.htm
Regards,
Sun
-
Why does she sound like she's high on weed?
-
I would be careful with that garbage sundowner. You could end up upsetting a genuine American someday and with typical luck of a fool there wont be any police from your dreaded police state nearby to help you.
Just an observation :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Fishu
Why does she sound like she's high on weed?
She's trying to sound cool. Instead she just comes off as a sweetheartbag. I turned it off for this point alone.
-
Originally posted by Yeager
I would be careful with that garbage sundowner. You could end up upsetting a genuine American someday and with typical luck of a fool there wont be any police from your dreaded police state nearby to help you.
Just an observation :rolleyes:
It's ok, bud.
I always believed God created man, Sam Colt made them equal.;)
Regards,
Sun
-
For those not willing to sit through a long propaganda flick...
It starts with showing and listening to the police target specific activists with the camera and arresting some guy apparently doing nothing at all. He was previously identified as a “leader” figure, and right after the cop with the camera drives past him, he gets jumped by bike cops. Then it shows video of the police very calmly discussing their tactical move to push protestors out of the area (Portland, 2002) with zero crowd incitement or actual rioting in progress. The media consistently reported that the protesters were moved because of a single bottle thrown from the protesters, however the police-shot video seems to show that there was no precipitous action at the time the move was being planned and put into action.
The video is obviously propaganda, and throughout they try to draw parallels between the police actions and Hitler. Although I think we’re a long way from Nazi Germany, it is extremely disturbing seeing the police gather intelligence on protesters and then calmly plan a street-clearing that was widely reported as if the cops cleared the street to stop a riot. I distinctly remember watching the news about this incident and thinking that rioting protesters get what they deserve, but the police video clearly shows that there was no riot.
I encourage you to watch it all the way through, even though the obvious propaganda slant is over the top and the narrator sounds like she’s stoned. It drags on as all really good sophomoric propaganda videos do, but the stuff at the end is fairly interesting as it is a stark contrast to what was reported in the popular media about the incident.
Interestingly, it brings up a question. What should people do when the government targets people who you think are nuts, but who are otherwise harmless? It does make me wonder if we are in the same position as someone in Germany before the govt started rounding up Jews, but after they started taking their names…
Thank god for the Posse Comitatus act… However the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 slightly re-writes the insurrection act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrection_Act) to more easily allow the use of the military for police functions. Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act) links to the text of the bill, pg 322-323 here: http://www.govtrack.us/data/us/bills.text/109/h/h5122.pdf.
-
Originally posted by Yeager
I would be careful with that garbage sundowner. You could end up upsetting a genuine American someday and with typical luck of a fool there wont be any police from your dreaded police state nearby to help you.
Just an observation :rolleyes:
The problem however, is that like all good propaganda flicks this one has a fairly disturbing element of truth. I distinctly remember the media coverage of the 2002 incident, and the media made it sound like the cops broke up a violent riot. The police video clearly shows a different story. There simply wasn't a riot going on. The street even looks completely clean, so frankly the report of a thrown bottle sounds like an utter fabrication. At the time of the riot police movement action, as well as the time of the movement briefing, there is no sign that the crowd is anything but a 100% peaceful event. There is no crowd unrest, and isn't even all that loud as you'd expect from a crowd getting ready to turn violent. You can even hear the camera cop muttering to himself.
Again, it's an interesting propaganda flick. I am very happy that Posse Comitatus and the Insurrection Act have not been significantly challenged or exercised, although the confiscation of guns after Katrina does have me a bit worried. The next time a hurricane wipes out a city, will it be the Army rounding up people's guns?
-
Originally posted by Sundowner
Any questions?
yes,
you where blind folded last 5 years?
-
Check this vid out. The police state in Berkeley is a little behind the times, apparently.
"Your being neutral in letting them violate the law. Is that your function? no, it is not our function....were trying to remain neutral as possible"
What garbage.
I will take a well organized and well policed society any day over the objections of these morons.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d33_1202865405
-
Originally posted by Yeager
I will take a well organized and well policed society any day over the objections of these morons.
That's what they all said prior to the change into the fascism.
-
Originally posted by Sundowner
Any questions?
Yeah, did the R-tardress have a point to her very slowly delivered diatribe? She would do well to take a constitutional law class. Though I really doubt that's on her agenda, or in her budget.
-Sik
-
That's what they all said prior to the change into the fascism.
====
did "they all" have a 2nd amendment in a bill of rights amended to a constitution?
Go ahead, think on it some and get back to me :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Yeager
did "they all" have a 2nd amendment in a bill of rights amended to a constitution?
Go ahead, think on it some and get back to me :rolleyes:
What good are the guns if the beholders do not object to the fascism? Fascism isn't simply about enslaving people, it's about the majority of people siding with their government of choice. It's all good for some time.
-
Originally posted by Fishu
What good are the guns if the beholders do not object to the fascism? Fascism isn't simply about enslaving people, it's about the majority of people siding with their government of choice. It's all good for some time.
The second amendment says nothing about a Majority or it's intentions.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
The second amendment says nothing about a Majority or it's intentions.
Good luck with your guerrilla war.
-
I can't help but notice the uncanny similarities between the methods that the portland police employ and those of the russian police. Video servielance, identify leaders, snatch them, disperse the protest with force and then the state media news reports how a riot was quelled.
-
Her voice makes me want to kill myself.
-
your points are well taken fishu. 65 million gun owners are a formidble "guerrilla" force :aok
-
So the narrator, speaking of police having video of the demonstration says:
I don't want the government having this kind of information about me
So she posts it on the internet for anyone to see.
Apparently she is what an idiot look like.
-
not for it.
it is interesting to note that this type of surveillence may have existed even before hitler came to power, as seen in this image of him as a young man in a crowd in munich near the beginning of WWI.
(http://www.militaryimages.net/photopost/data/575/5hitler_in_the_crowd.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Yeager
your points are well taken fishu. 65 million gun owners are a formidble "guerrilla" force :aok
I hate repeating myself..
It's not like fascism suddenly appears over a day to oppress the people which of 99.9% are against it. No, it's not like that. Fascism is created step by step by influencing the general population to accept it willingly. The goal is to maintain the opposing side as a small minority and force most of them to adapt or face a toughening life as the majority ignores them as unpatriotic.
The majority is slowly made to accept tiny bit more restrictive laws one after another while keeping a close eye to the level of content of the majority. Most of the people happily live on their lives and they won't even remember how much less restrictive their lives were a few years back. It's a creeping progress towards the extreme right. At the end the people will find out they're living a very different life, but it's too late to turn back. The freedom has been redefined.
Most of the fascist countries were democracies before the change. All of those were backed by the majority for the first decade or two.
-
Originally posted by Fishu
I hate repeating myself..
It's not like fascism suddenly appears over a day to oppress the people which of 99.9% are against it. No, it's not like that. Fascism is created step by step by influencing the general population to accept it willingly. The goal is to maintain the opposing side as a small minority and force most of them to adapt or face a toughening life as the majority ignores them as unpatriotic.
The majority is slowly made to accept tiny bit more restrictive laws one after another while keeping a close eye to the level of content of the majority. Most of the people happily live on their lives and they won't even remember how much less restrictive their lives were a few years back. It's a creeping progress towards the extreme right. At the end the people will find out they're living a very different life, but it's too late to turn back. The freedom has been redefined.
Most of the fascist countries were democracies before the change. All of those were backed by the majority for the first decade or two.
Very good explanation of incrementalism and how it's used to bring about social change (in this case fascism) right before an unsuspecting population's eyes.
Regards,
Sun
-
Originally posted by Suave
I can't help but notice the uncanny similarities between the methods that the portland police employ and those of the russian police. Video servielance, identify leaders, snatch them, disperse the protest with force and then the state media news reports how a riot was quelled.
I agree.
Regards,
Sun
-
I saw a peaceful demonstration that was exercising their first amendment rights to speak out against the government broken up, imo, illegally. I saw no violence from any of the protesters. Were some of them rude? Sure, but being rude isn't the same as being violent.
-
Originally posted by Sundowner
Any questions?
(caution:some objectionable language)
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19347.htm
Regards,
Sun
This has to be one of the most moronic pieces of leftist, liberal trash Ive seen in a long time. But Ive been to Oregon, Washington State, and parts of California. The 1960s Hippies and Yuppies had to find somewhere to live after their little revolution ran out of steam.
Video is very easily edited as is the audio. I guess that never occurred to you Elfie. The flagburners who put this together clearly had an agenda and no doubt showing criminal actions of Protesters wasnt high on their list.:huh And I think the nitwit who was is orating it should sit down with one of the Holocaust survivors before she starts comparing America to Nazi Germany.
The only Fascist country that started off as a Democracy I can think of was Germany in between the world wars. Even then Democracy was short lived and tenuous.
Im all ears Fishu if you can name others.:lol
-
Originally posted by Fishu
I hate repeating myself..
It's not like fascism suddenly appears over a day to oppress the people which of 99.9% are against it. No, it's not like that. Fascism is created step by step by influencing the general population to accept it willingly. The goal is to maintain the opposing side as a small minority and force most of them to adapt or face a toughening life as the majority ignores them as unpatriotic.
The majority is slowly made to accept tiny bit more restrictive laws one after another while keeping a close eye to the level of content of the majority. Most of the people happily live on their lives and they won't even remember how much less restrictive their lives were a few years back. It's a creeping progress towards the extreme right. At the end the people will find out they're living a very different life, but it's too late to turn back. The freedom has been redefined.
Most of the fascist countries were democracies before the change. All of those were backed by the majority for the first decade or two.
So if it is not illegal, and if a majority of the population wants it...what is the basis for your objection? You know better than the majority and the government? Yeah, that was the sort of justification the RAF used to motivate their actions.
-
Originally posted by Yeager
I would be careful with that garbage sundowner. You could end up upsetting a genuine American someday and with typical luck of a fool there wont be any police from your dreaded police state nearby to help you.
Just an observation :rolleyes:
Protect me from what?
In 46 years I've yet to see the police "protect" me from anything.
I have however when I was a kid seen two cops do nothing but sit in their car watching as I had to fist fight two home boys trying to rob me of a new tire I had picked up for my bicycle.
Afterwards when I complained ot them about their inaction they said "What did you want us to do. You got your tire back didnt you?"
I learned right then and there you cant trust the police can protect you from anything. Even if they see it happening.
At BEST. The police are first responders AFTER sopmething has already happend.
The time they actually protect people out of the times they respond to something that happened is probably in the range of 1 in 10,000.
-
So where does her little speech stop about not wanting the government to have her activities on record stop; and her diatribe about free speech begin?
Good stuff, le sweetheart bags...
-
So you dont think we "protect" anyone? The countless violent felons, predators, scam artists, and lifelong criminals we lock up every day? You dont think that "protects" anyone?
I just got convictions on an armed stickup crew I caught in the act of holding up a Liquor store. They had pistol whipped the owner and told him they were going to kill him. Luckily for him he was able to get to the alarm and we caught them guns still in hands. You dont think that, and all the scores like that a copper does in his career doesnt "protect" anyone?
Your 46yo DredIock. Its really time to grow up. Ive made countless on view felony pinches that nobody ever called me for first.
But on behalf of all my LEO brothers and sisters I'd like to say "thanks" for stereotyping all 400,000 of us due to your little adventure as a little kid on your little bicycle.:lol You got issues dude.
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Protect me from what?
In 46 years I've yet to see the police "protect" me from anything.
I have however when I was a kid seen two cops do nothing but sit in their car watching as I had to fist fight two home boys trying to rob me of a new tire I had picked up for my bicycle.
Afterwards when I complained ot them about their inaction they said "What did you want us to do. You got your tire back didnt you?"
I learned right then and there you cant trust the police can protect you from anything. Even if they see it happening.
At BEST. The police are first responders AFTER sopmething has already happend.
The time they actually protect people out of the times they respond to something that happened is probably in the range of 1 in 10,000.
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
So you dont think we "protect" anyone? The countless violent felons, predators, scam artists, and lifelong criminals we lock up every day? You dont think that "protects" anyone?
I just got convictions on an armed stickup crew I caught in the act of holding up a Liquor store. They had pistol whipped the owner and told him they were going to kill him. Luckily for him he was able to get to the alarm and we caught them guns still in hands. You dont think that, and all the scores like that a copper does in his career doesnt "protect" anyone?
Your 46yo DredIock. Its really time to grow up. Ive made countless on view felony pinches that nobody ever called me for first.
But on behalf of all my LEO brothers and sisters I'd like to say "thanks" for stereotyping all 400,000 of us due to your little adventure as a little kid on your little bicycle.:lol You got issues dude.
:aok You basically covered it, saved me from climbing up on the soap box :D
-
Originally posted by Sikboy
Yeah, did the R-tardress have a point to her very slowly delivered diatribe? She would do well to take a constitutional law class. Though I really doubt that's on her agenda, or in her budget.
-Sik
Perhaps she is delivering her propaganda slowly because the folks she is trying to incite are of the lower IQ and slower thinking bunch. The can't run subtitles as their target audience, for the most part, is probably illiterate.
-
The lady sounds high on pot.. the hero guy is wearing a t shirt when everyone else is wearing coats and/or rain gear. Any cop will tell you that the guy half dressed is the one who is loaded.
I would bet that the cops started talking to the guy and realized he was high as hell.
I think it has been noted that the same people show up at every protest.. no matter what it is about.
This is not worth me getting shook up about.. the cops have every right to film events like that. I don't think any of us would like it if we were not allowed to film the cops?
lazs
-
What I find odd is if the Police are using these tapes to secretly tape the ringleaders, how did she get ahold of them.
Bunch of wacko libs
-
Originally posted by Tango
What I find odd is if the Police are using these tapes to secretly tape the ringleaders, how did she get ahold of them.
Bunch of wacko libs
The Police probably gave them to her. Or her little group of whackouts. The reason we tape it is the same reason we have cameras taping traffic stops. To protect ourselves!
And it wasnt all that secret. Normally in these kinds of marches, at least the ones that turn violent, there is that small cadre of screwballs that will start trouble in order to get media time and fame in furtherance of their little manifesto.
Portland Police compared to the Russian Police? :rofl
Thats right up there with saying History is Littered with Democracies turning into Fascist states.:lol Some of you guys must be from Oregon. You just crack me up.:aok
-
Basically the police everywhere are a little bit fascist. It's inherent in the nature of the job they do. Even in America. That's why in democratic countries they are restricted in what they can and cannot do.
The video is essentially an attempt to portray the police in that light and link it to a wider perception that America is heading down the road to fascism. In fact, it just demonstrates the actions of a single police force on a single day.
But it is a warning that freedom of speech applies to everyone whether you like the message or not. Labelling people as 'unpatriotic' and then suppressing their protest is fascism. In fact, a common left wing tactic is to provoke exactly that sort of response.
Better not to play into their hands.
-
Sorry, I couldn't read all the posts...
Just want to say that the clip was done in the form of propaganda.
Many people who legally and peacefully demonstrate are infiltrated by those who feel it is justified to break the law with the intention of precipitating a reaction from the police in the hopes that there will be usable film to magnify their efforts. They don't care about collateral injuries to peaceful people, even though collateral injuries are foreseeable when they start tossing things at police or otherwise violate the restrictions of their permit to assemble. And they know it.
The lack of film showing any police brutality is prima facie evidence that it didn't occur, and the premise that police photography capturing details of front line demonstrators, most frequently unlawful agitators who intentionally bring grief to lawful demonstrators for effect, is for "nazi surveillance' to later track down "enemies of the state" - is bogus. It is part of the anarchist's propaganda.
The girl narrator did sound sexy tho.
-
note: the reason I say that the lack of film showing anything other than lawful acts on the part of police is prima fascie evidence is because there are so many cameras running at these things anymore, you can BET that whatever film exists against "nazi fascist police" will be shown, and the lawsuits would certainly fly.
Apparently, there were none - only this pathetic cannabis stoked production...
-
Further, the same anarchist groups - outsiders who were not from Portland - also showed up in Miami for the FTAA demonstration.
Again in Miami, they were outsiders who intentionally violated the law and the restrictions of their permits to assemble. They intentionally endangered every-day people who were law abiding. Their intent was to stir up as much ***** as possible.
They violated there permits. And they were promptly out-manuvered and handed their heads by magnificently trained officers from a regional task force. These anarchists didn't stand a chance.
With all the film that was rolling from both sides, and all the hot wind and liberal press and wildly leftist lawyers in attendance and associated with this event, the anarchists fell flat on their faces. No cops were disciplined. No cops were fired. No cops were sued successfully. The anarchists were funneled to take-down zones, and efficiently neutralized. (take a number, jerk) Their sophomoric, bird-flipping agitation only hurt the cause that they were allegedly supporting. If you want to call anarchy a cause.
-
does sundowner believe he lives in a fascist, nazi nation?
-
Video is very easily edited as is the audio. I guess that never occurred to you Elfie.
Of course it is.
Yet....if you were very observant at all you would have seen the streets were clean in all camera shots, all of them.....no one is throwing stuff at the officers. If they were, you would see at least some of the trash in the streets or on the sidewalks but there is none of that.
-
Elfie, the seduction of propaganda films is all in the omissions.
You do not see the lawful, signed contract for permit to assemble along with the limitations on location, times, or the fact that it is illegal to wear masks in public. You do not even see all the film that was shot.
All you see is what they (anarchists) want you to see, which they freely obtained from the "nazi fascist" police department under the freedom of information act. They didn't need an attorney. All they had to do is ask for it.
And all of these groups begin by disobeying one of the limits on their right to assemble.... such as location. Or agreed time limits, etc. Then, when the police are called to enforce it, they hope to incite others to a newsworthy event. This is against the law.
Fortunately, police in major cities these days are trained very well for this. They are disciplined. They are really the best people you could know.
An anarchist could be jumping up and down waving a Molotov cocktail next to your grandma in a wheelchair who is expressing her right to dissent. Nine times out of ten, the anarchist is going to be hit with multiple non-lethal rounds that will take the pee right out of him. One time out of ten, your grandma is going to take a rubber round because she is right next to your out of state anarchist, waving her flag.
My suggestion is that you inform your grandma what I just informed you about... be careful who you position yourself next to. If you don't know them, or you think they might be out of state - they are not necessarily your friends. That is why they wear the masks. Don't be a victim.
Sundowner's clip is not news. Its chum for discussion. I hope. America has more safeguards on freedom of expression than any other place I know.... but I've never been to Europe....
-
Originally posted by Elfie
Of course it is.
Yet....if you were very observant at all you would have seen the streets were clean in all camera shots, all of them.....no one is throwing stuff at the officers. If they were, you would see at least some of the trash in the streets or on the sidewalks but there is none of that.
Oh brother. How do you respond to something like this?:huh
-
Originally posted by Yeager
your points are well taken fishu. 65 million gun owners are a formidble "guerrilla" force :aok
Seemed to work out rather well in the late 1700s as well :aok
-
Am I the only one that sees the irony here? Opening lines are about a policeman filming them and getting peoples pictures...
So the film director decided to film the protests and put everybody in its picture on the internet for the whole world to see?
Wow. :huh :lol
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
The flagburners who put this together clearly had an agenda and no doubt showing criminal actions of Protesters wasnt high on their list.:
Ok so show us some footage of some of their criminal actions.
I dont remember the media showing any. I only remember them saying there was a bottle thrown.
I dont remember ever seeing any footage of it in spite of all the coverage it was getting.
One would think someone would have footage of such an act.
And since when does the act of a single bottle being thrown.
justify pepperspraying an entire group of people?
I didnt perticularly like the protesters or agree with what they were protesting.
But the fact of the matter remains.
They have the right to speak out and protest. Even if we dont agree with what they are protesting.
Cant have that right if its only going to be for the things we agree with
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
So you dont think we "protect" anyone? The countless violent felons, predators, scam artists, and lifelong criminals we lock up every day? You dont think that "protects" anyone?
I just got convictions on an armed stickup crew I caught in the act of holding up a Liquor store. They had pistol whipped the owner and told him they were going to kill him. Luckily for him he was able to get to the alarm and we caught them guns still in hands. You dont think that, and all the scores like that a copper does in his career doesnt "protect" anyone?
Your 46yo DredIock. Its really time to grow up. Ive made countless on view felony pinches that nobody ever called me for first.
But on behalf of all my LEO brothers and sisters I'd like to say "thanks" for stereotyping all 400,000 of us due to your little adventure as a little kid on your little bicycle.:lol You got issues dude.
No what I said was the times you "protect" anyone in comparison to the times you respond to an event thats already happened is probably 1 in 10,000.
you caught the guy in the act. He had alredy pistolwhipped the owner.
you responded to an event AFTER it was already taking place.
My brother in law not 3 weeks ago was pistolwhipped and robbed.
For every criminal you catch, there are 100 more out there.
Trust me. you do little that actually protects anyone from anything.
Occasionally yes. But before...very rare. Or I should say very little in the greater scheme of things.
I am grown up. And without any issues. I''ve based my pinions on 46 years of life experience. not just that one incident.
Furthermore I have repeatedly stated my utmost respect for the police.
but I dont kid myself into thinking they are something they are not.
As first responders you all are great.
If I get beaten and robbed. or my kid (god forbid) ends up missing.
I'll give you a call to track them down.
But for protection.
Nobody can protect me better then me. And I certainly dont count on the police to.
And I wouldnt want the type of country it would take for you to have that kind of power.
-
Originally posted by SWrokit
:aok You basically covered it, saved me from climbing up on the soap box :D
I dont see a big "S" on your chest.
But if you feel like your Superman too.
Go ahead and fly
-
Originally posted by indy007
Am I the only one that sees the irony here? Opening lines are about a policeman filming them and getting peoples pictures...
So the film director decided to film the protests and put everybody in its picture on the internet for the whole world to see?
Wow. :huh :lol
I see what your saying.
but I dont think your average Joe citizen is planning on keeping video on file for future reference. such as to ID people either.
-
How can I? I wasnt there and Im not a Portland P.O.
I draw no conclusions from an edited Internet video. Neither should you. And "none" means "none". I must admit tho I loved the opening. Boy theres some real "balanced" reporting.:lol
It has become kinda SOP for the whackout Left to portray us as monsters because we now wear a lot of riot gear and actually carry mace that works at least 1/2 the time. I remember the sports riots I got thrown into when all I had was a lousy bad fitting helmut. Boy I sure wished I had one of those turtle suits.
And you have to wonder why all those PPD POs would even be there dressed like that? That and some of the comments makes it obvious this isn't the first march from this group. Why would they just grab a guy for no reason and arrest him? And even tho its Police footage that doesnt mean they were able to capture everything. Its also obvious there is video from several events made to look like one.
As a video editor my ownself, "yes I do weddings and events/corporate work", you cant even be sure of the audio. In the age of NLEs and DV it would be childs play to stripe an audio clip onto a timeline and make it seem like LEOs are the ones doing the talking.
OK they got us on that one. I mace at least 6 babies a shift. Its my personal quota and I rarely fail to make it.:lol
Tellya the truth I cant even watch the entire thing it is so idiotic. And the people behind it have a lot of nerve trivializing the Holocaust, trying to compare it to their own little adventure, and using scenes of it horrific nature to further whatever cause they have. With most the only selfish cause they have is that they are angry someone they didn't vote for got in office.
-
The film we are seeing is the copy this group got from the police. The film has been doctored and sequences moved around to support the story of the narrator.
Did you notice there is only a year and day stamp on the film. No time stamp. If you were going to cut the film apart and resequnce it to support your version of reality you would have to remove the time stamp. Especially since the narration wants you to beleive this is a liniar time progresion of events.
Also the police captian's lips are not saying what the incerted captioning is saying at many points in the film. Makes me wonder how much of the audio has been dubbed since some of the lines sound like kids trying to sound like bad cops.
You cannot make an assesment of the police or protesters in this film because of no context to tulips anyones motivation. You can only analyse the frames as isolated incidents. You don't know in each frame what caused any given action taking place because segments have been left out.
Funny thats exactly how the Natzi propaganda service doctored films to make them look like innocent lambs.
-
This is What a Liberal Whackjob Looks Like
-
I would assume that they are tapeing as evidence. 9/10 these protests (as stated earlier) have that troublemaker element in them that don't necesarily repersent the protest as a whole. They usually set things on fire or pick fights and what not. I don't think it's illegal to be filmed by ANYONE while in PUBLIC. There's no right to privacy while your at a public event in the middle of the street.
When these officers go to court to testify that a specific individual broke the law while being arrested at a protest i'm pretty sure there lawyer asks "what proof do you have"? The cops now can simply say...."here you go".
Not to mention they usually get a bad rap at things like this as they arrest the troublemakers and the crowd turns on them as they didn't see the aleged crime take place.
The fact that the protestors got THE COP'S footage to me tells me the system is working. There's no secret Mcarthyism goin on here.
-
They have the right to speak out and protest. - Drediock
Dred, Its like so many things that seem simple on the face of it... that turn out not to be as simple as you might think.
Sure, in our country, we honor the long standing right of free speech. But there are limitations. You have to have a plan, you have to show the authorities your plan and have it approved by them because you have charged them with public safety ( remember, you sue them if you feel that they haven't used due care to protect the public, right????) Then you are obligated to follow the plan you submitted.
Sooooo, you must obey the limitations. You can't block I-95 with your protest, for example. Does that make sense to you? It is against the law to block lawful travel and commerce that way - it infringes on the rights and safety of others.
If that makes sense, maybe you could agree that certain restrictions on the right to assemble and for free speech might be appropriate?
So the parties in Miami agreed to have the demonstration at a certain place and to end the demonstration at a certain time for the sake of public safety.
Except they don't end it, and they don't stay where they were supposed to.
Now what do you do? You can't just sit on the curb and wring your hands. That wouldn't be good, Drediock. Inaction only emboldens the elements that want chaos. The same people in that very protest would sue your prettythang off for failure to act to protect the public.
So allow me to tell you how to react to that situation. You end it as quickly and with as little injury as possible. You don't plead. You don't beg. You act with overwhelming force. This results in the fewest injuries. The problem is snuffed out just like it was in Miami.
If that was so wrong, why were these fine upstanding men and women from South Florida law enforcement who did their jobs not thrown in prison? Oh sure, there was a lot of weeping, threats of lawsuits and gnashing of teeth. but nothing became of any of it.
No, the issue is that you do not understand the nature of propaganda, or the laws relating to public assembly. In this case, it wouldn't be too far out to say it was a matter of national security. The President of the United States was not far from there at the time, along with many other heads of state - in a post 911 world.
There were many injuries in this demonstration by the way - both civilian and police.
It is very simple. The rules were agreed on before hand. The protesters broke the rules. Those charged with the public order immediately shut them down. It was actually a nice piece of police work. If you've ever been in a demonstration that was out of hand, or in a riot, you would appreciate it.