NationStates Jolt Archive

And are urging people not only to turn off foxnews but to call them up and demand that they act fair and balanced. For those of you who still dont think Foxnews doesnt have an extremist bias then maybe you can explain why Bill O'Lielly is calling patriotic dissenters "terrorists"
*btw that thing burning in front of MSG was a papier mache dragon

O'Reilly said that distracting the NYC police from protecting U.S. citizens, via violent protest, was "terrorist."

O'Reilly said that distracting the NYC police from protecting U.S. citizens, via violent protest, was "terrorist."

So violent protest is OK? So much for peaceful demonstrations.

Didn't some "protestors" plan on using chemicals to incapacitate police dogs? What if they fail to detect a bomb?

O'Reilly said that distracting the NYC police from protecting U.S. citizens, via violent protest, was "terrorist."

O'Reilly is a feeb. The occasional dumbass hothead doesn't make a protest 'violent'.

O'Reilly said that distracting the NYC police from protecting U.S. citizens, via violent protest, was "terrorist."
then O'reilly should tell the cops not to provoke violence but why doesnt O'reilly talk about the terrorism called police brutality?

So violent protest is OK? So much for peaceful demonstrations.

Didn't some "protestors" plan on using chemicals to incapacitate police dogs? What if they fail to detect a bomb?
Im sure that story is just another odious foxnews lie

Im sure that story is just another odious foxnews lie

CNN actually. Unfortunately for you, the actions of the NYPD are accountable to the city of New York. The nutcase protestors don't answer to anybody, therefore they are more likely to provoke violence than the police.

True enough. Besides, The NYPD only beats and sodomizes suspects with foreign objects during questioning. On the streets, they just shoot you. :D

P.S. I disagree with my own statement above. It's every bit as unfair as saying that all protesters are terrorists.

I still say that every time the whackjobs start destroying property, the U.S Army should go Tiananmen Square on their collective asses.

Sure you have your right to protest. And I have my right to not have to replace my broken windows.

Also, running over protestors standing in the middle of the street should be legal. Hey, they're interfering with my right to go places.

CNN actually. Unfortunately for you, the actions of the NYPD are accountable to the city of New York. The nutcase protestors don't answer to anybody, therefore they are more likely to provoke violence than the police.
CNN is trying to outfox Fox so they dont have much more credability anyway-CNN had RALPH REED of all people covering the Dem convention. And cops are never held accountable for protest violence they cause so thats not exactly a big deterrent for them--most protesters are by nature peaceful but alot of cops are violent sociopaths which is why they took a job like that in the first place. There were studies done that showed most bullies in HS went on to become cops as adults, and that a healthy percenatge of police are wife beaters too.

CNN is trying to outfox Fox so they dont have much more credability anyway-CNN had RALPH REED of all people covering the Dem convention. And cops are never held accountable for protest violence they cause so thats not exactly a big deterrent for them--most protesters are by nature peaceful but alot of cops are violent sociopaths which is why they took a job like that in the first place. There were studies done that showed most bullies in HS went on to become cops as adults, and that a healthy percenatge of police are wife beaters too.

Well, once again, there you have it.

I still say that every time the whackjobs start destroying property, the U.S Army should go Tiananmen Square on their collective asses.

Sure you have your right to protest. And I have my right to not have to replace my broken windows.

Also, running over protestors standing in the middle of the street should be legal. Hey, they're interfering with my right to go places.
conservatives always put property above human rights and life itself

conservatives always put property above human rights and life itself

Hey retard, I'm a libertarian. And property is a human right.

Hey retard, I'm a libertarian. And property is a human right.

I'm a libertarian too, and property is irrelevant.

property is good but its meaningless if you lose all your freedoms

conservatives always put property above human rights and life itself
So you're saying people should have the right to destroy others' property simply because they don't like a certain political ideology?

So violent protest is OK? So much for peaceful demonstrations.

Not at all. Are you under the impression that I'm "okay" with these bleeding heart leftist?

Didn't some "protestors" plan on using chemicals to incapacitate police dogs? What if they fail to detect a bomb?

This is exactly why these leftist partisans need to be dealt with militarily. We need to take note from China like Tyrandis suggested.

Property is not a human right. Why is it that those who shout and scream about non-democratic foreigners also seem to be most vocal against the right to protest?

Property is not a human right. Why is it that those who shout and scream about non-democratic foreigners also seem to be most vocal against the right to protest?

Of course it is. The NYPD isn't interested in stopping protests, they want to prevent violence. Get it?

Uh, last I checked Bill O'Reilly is a commentator. That means he doesn't need to be Fair and Balanced(r) and can be as one-sided as he wants. Frankly I don't see the problem with FNC. Since news will never be completely objective, I think that the obvious conservative slant of Fox News pretty much balances out CNN, PBS, ABC, CBS, and NBC which arguably lean more toward the left.

Bottom line is, YOU have the power to change the channel. Don't like what you're seeing? Push a button and watch something else! It's called consumer freedom, and FNC has a format that's popular and making money, so more power to them. I WOULD be alarmed if FNC were the only news source out there, but it's not.

MoveOn and Robert Greenwald need to quit their whining and change the damn channel already.

Of course it is. The NYPD isn't interested in stopping protests, they want to prevent violence. Get it?

Like King George prevented violence in Iraq?

Like King George prevented violence in Iraq?

Yep. Iraq was peaceful and serene before Gulf II. Just like Michael Moore said.

Property is not a human right. Why is it that those who shout and scream about non-democratic foreigners also seem to be most vocal against the right to protest?

Yes it is. The right to own property is a human right. The right to enjoy the fruits of your labor is a human right.

Also, I have no idea what the hell you are talking about non-democratic foreigners. Legal immigration = win.

So violent protest is OK? So much for peaceful demonstrations.

Didn't some "protestors" plan on using chemicals to incapacitate police dogs? What if they fail to detect a bomb?
Well, that is the length that some people are willing to go to to drive George Bush out of office. It is sickening, and you can hardly call those kind of people humans, but they will.

property is good but its meaningless if you lose all your freedoms

And what freedoms does anyone lose? Your right to protest ends when my right to property and security begins.

So you're saying people should have the right to destroy others' property simply because they don't like a certain political ideology?
it depends-if its the property of an evil, faceless corporation a case can be made to justify it

Property is not a human right.
Locke says it is. We just changed it to the "pursuit of happiness" because it's more poetic.

Well, that is the length that some people are willing to go to to drive George Bush out of office. It is sickening, and you can hardly call those kind of people humans, but they will.

Some people are not human? What in heavens name are they? Please tell me.

Locke says it is. We just changed it to the "pursuit of happiness" because it's more poetic.

Thank you. It is indeed.

it depends-if its the property of an evil, faceless corporation a case can be made to justify it

Enlighten me.

Of course it is. The NYPD isn't interested in stopping protests, they want to prevent violence. Get it?
LOL if the NYPD is tryin to prevent violence they should start arresting themselves

LOL if the NYPD is tryin to prevent violence they should start arresting themselves

Quit using LSD.

Uh, last I checked Bill O'Reilly is a commentator. That means he doesn't need to be Fair and Balanced(r) and can be as one-sided as he wants. Frankly I don't see the problem with FNC. Since news will never be completely objective, I think that the obvious conservative slant of Fox News pretty much balances out CNN, PBS, ABC, CBS, and NBC which arguably lean more toward the left.

Bottom line is, YOU have the power to change the channel. Don't like what you're seeing? Push a button and watch something else! It's called consumer freedom, and FNC has a format that's popular and making money, so more power to them. I WOULD be alarmed if FNC were the only news source out there, but it's not.

MoveOn and Robert Greenwald need to quit their whining and change the damn channel already.O'reilly presents himself as being "fair and balanced" and calls his show a "no-spin zone"--if hes gonna use dishonest labels like that then hes gonna be called on his hypocrisy and lies--and those other corporate stations you listed do not lean left at all btw

LOL if the NYPD is tryin to prevent violence they should start arresting themselves

Let go of the bong man. Let go.

Well, that is the length that some people are willing to go to to drive George Bush out of office. It is sickening, and you can hardly call those kind of people humans, but they will.
If Bush gets elected expect far worse as the nation falls into a state of anarchistic disintegration--Bush is tearing America apart at the seams and making us all more divided then at any time since the civil war

Enlighten me.
Im trying to :headbang:

There were studies done that showed most bullies in HS went on to become cops as adults, and that a healthy percenatge of police are wife beaters too.
Doesn't it make your ass hurt to pull these studies out?

Like King George prevented violence in Iraq?

only 21 posts till someone whined about Iraq and Bush....is that a record??

I feel sorry for these people, what will they do when Bush is NO longer president?? Bash the next poor(or rich) bastard in office?? LOL

only 21 posts till someone whined about Iraq and Bush....is that a record??

I feel sorry for these people, what will they do when Bush is NO longer president?? Bash the next poor(or rich) bastard in office?? LOL

I whined? As for King George no longer being president........bring it on!

Doesn't it make your ass hurt to pull these studies out?
lol

more power to you. Besides, everyone knows 97% of studies are false. :)

MKULTRA, I salute you. You've actually managed to become a parody of yourself.

Doesn't it make your ass hurt to pull these studies out?
LOL no its a relief :D

Im trying to :headbang:

Well you're doing a crappy job, must be from banging your head against a wall :D

it depends-if its the property of an evil, faceless corporation a case can be made to justify it
Yes, because smashing in windows and doors, looting stores and ruining people's lives is the proper way to fight against the Evil Faceless Corporations© :rolleyes:

lol

more power to you. Besides, everyone knows 97% of studies are false. :)
so is 98% of stats

MKULTRA, I salute you. You've actually managed to become a parody of yourself.
how did I do that? :confused:

I whined? As for King George no longer being president........bring it on!

it will happen in November or 4 years later....what will the excuses be then(November/ 4 years from now?)??

I still say that every time the whackjobs start destroying property, the U.S Army should go Tiananmen Square on their collective asses.

Sure you have your right to protest. And I have my right to not have to replace my broken windows.

Also, running over protestors standing in the middle of the street should be legal. Hey, they're interfering with my right to go places.
Mo' like I run you over fo' bein' stupid foo'! Violent protestors are hyppocrits and I wish I had one now so I could kick him in the nuts. Yes I realize the irony.

Well you're doing a crappy job, must be from banging your head against a wall :D


Yes, because smashing in windows and doors, looting stores and ruining people's lives is the proper way to fight against the Evil Faceless Corporations© :rolleyes:
money is the only thing corporate maggots understand

Ignore the wilfully ignorant Arrow. You keep on keeping on.

it will happen in November or 4 years later....what will the excuses be then(November/ 4 years from now?)??

If that person performs as disasterously as George, then he too should feel the wrath of the people.

And cops are never held accountable for protest violence they cause so thats not exactly a big deterrent for them--most protesters are by nature peaceful but alot of cops are violent sociopaths which is why they took a job like that in the first place.

As a nephew of a cop I resent that. Cops are held accountable, that's why they're busted down a rank, discharged, or have criminal charges filed against them. Most cops are in their job because they feel a desire to protect, and most cops quit because idiots like you ridicule them. Most protest are peaceful, and most protests are never on TV. Most protestors, as individuals, are peaceful, but studies (real studies) show that when in large groups people tend to be more suspectible to wilder emotions and behaviors (read a psychology textbook if you doubt me). Cops are trained to deal with that with the minimum force deemed necessary. If a crowd turns violent using tear gas is not extreme, it's simply wise. It doesn't really hurt anyone long term, helps protect the community and themselves. If they're attacked, them disabling a guy is not excessive force (by disabling I am including breaking a wrist or a leg if they are excessively violent, there's no reason why a cop should endanger their life in order that some jerk can be in jail with perfect health). However, beating a guy with the night stick after they're cuffed and subdued, that is excessive violence. Fortunately those instances are rare, it's just that media (including Fox News) tend to continually show us every instance over and over again months after it happened. We also don't get shown the whole picture, if a guy is in cuffs but kicks a cop in the groin, them hitting him in the face is far from police brutality.

Sorry, maybe I expect our police force to actually protect us from violence, and maybe I support those people to much. But **** it, I can sit here and write this argument because there's someone out there protecting me right now.

Mo' like I run you over fo' bein' stupid foo'! Violent protestors are hyppocrits and I wish I had one now so I could kick him in the nuts. Yes I realize the irony.

You realise the irony of what you say and you still post. Yes, you do seem qualified to call people idiots.

About Police Brutality: If you don't break the law, the cops won't beat the fuck out of you. If you break the law, be prepared to face the consequences. Just don't blame the Police for doing their jobs, busting the brains of violent protestors protects us law-abiding citizens, remember that? protest's don't need to be <b>that</b> aggresive to get their message across. And also, STOP BLOCKING THE DAMN ROAD WITH PROTESTS!

Ignore the wilfully ignorant Arrow. You keep on keeping on.
Thanks U2 comrade. Do something this week to express your hatred of Bush policies

As a nephew of a cop I resent that. Cops are held accountable, that's why they're busted down a rank, discharged, or have criminal charges filed against them. Most cops are in their job because they feel a desire to protect, and most cops quit because idiots like you ridicule them. Most protest are peaceful, and most protests are never on TV. Most protestors, as individuals, are peaceful, but studies (real studies) show that when in large groups people tend to be more suspectible to wilder emotions and behaviors (read a psychology textbook if you doubt me). Cops are trained to deal with that with the minimum force deemed necessary. If a crowd turns violent using tear gas is not extreme, it's simply wise. It doesn't really hurt anyone long term, helps protect the community and themselves. If they're attacked, them disabling a guy is not excessive force (by disabling I am including breaking a wrist or a leg if they are excessively violent, there's no reason why a cop should endanger their life in order that some jerk can be in jail with perfect health). However, beating a guy with the night stick after they're cuffed and subdued, that is excessive violence. Fortunately those instances are rare, it's just that media (including Fox News) tend to continually show us every instance over and over again months after it happened. We also don't get shown the whole picture, if a guy is in cuffs but kicks a cop in the groin, them hitting him in the face is far from police brutality.

Sorry, maybe I expect our police force to actually protect us from violence, and maybe I support those people to much. But **** it, I can sit here and write this argument because there's someone out there protecting me right now.

Well said.

Thanks U2 comrade. Do something this week to express your hatred of Bush policies

I do, fear not.

If that person performs as disasterously as George, then he too should feel the wrath of the people.
Jello Biafra said on air america just now that when Kerry topples the Tyrant that the people must keep a blowtorch up his ass to make sure he doesnt turn into another Clinton

You realise the irony of what you say and you still post. Yes, you do seem qualified to call people idiots.
I think I was just insulted. COOL!

As a nephew of a cop I resent that. Cops are held accountable, that's why they're busted down a rank, discharged, or have criminal charges filed against them. Most cops are in their job because they feel a desire to protect, and most cops quit because idiots like you ridicule them. Most protest are peaceful, and most protests are never on TV. Most protestors, as individuals, are peaceful, but studies (real studies) show that when in large groups people tend to be more suspectible to wilder emotions and behaviors (read a psychology textbook if you doubt me). Cops are trained to deal with that with the minimum force deemed necessary. If a crowd turns violent using tear gas is not extreme, it's simply wise. It doesn't really hurt anyone long term, helps protect the community and themselves. If they're attacked, them disabling a guy is not excessive force (by disabling I am including breaking a wrist or a leg if they are excessively violent, there's no reason why a cop should endanger their life in order that some jerk can be in jail with perfect health). However, beating a guy with the night stick after they're cuffed and subdued, that is excessive violence. Fortunately those instances are rare, it's just that media (including Fox News) tend to continually show us every instance over and over again months after it happened. We also don't get shown the whole picture, if a guy is in cuffs but kicks a cop in the groin, them hitting him in the face is far from police brutality.

Sorry, maybe I expect our police force to actually protect us from violence, and maybe I support those people to much. But **** it, I can sit here and write this argument because there's someone out there protecting me right now.
I agree with you to a point but that study that proves people act that way in a large crowd also applies to cops themselfs who are at the protests as a large group as well--cops also have a tendancy to show off in front of each other plus when a bad cop is acten up all the other cops cover for him instead of acten to stop the misconduct

About Police Brutality: If you don't break the law, the cops won't beat the fuck out of you. If you break the law, be prepared to face the consequences. Just don't blame the Police for doing their jobs, busting the brains of violent protestors protects us law-abiding citizens, remember that? protest's don't need to be <b>that</b> aggresive to get their message across. And also, STOP BLOCKING THE DAMN ROAD WITH PROTESTS!
Don't you just miss those days when cops or soldiers used life ammo to quench protests?

Don't you just miss those days when cops or soldiers used life ammo to quench protests?
Hah, yeah... Sadly, I don't know those days, but I'd like to see less court placed restrictions, etc. placed on the Police to restrict the efficiency of them being able to get their jobs done.

Don't you just miss those days when cops or soldiers used life ammo to quench protests?
No. Unless the live ammo was CANDY!

when a bad cop is acten up all the other cops cover for him instead of acten to stop the misconduct

That is also very true but alas, it's a human characteristic. The same applies to us all I'm afraid.

About Police Brutality: If you don't break the law, the cops won't beat the fuck out of you. If you break the law, be prepared to face the consequences. Just don't blame the Police for doing their jobs, busting the brains of violent protestors protects us law-abiding citizens, remember that? protest's don't need to be <b>that</b> aggresive to get their message across. And also, STOP BLOCKING THE DAMN ROAD WITH PROTESTS!
thats total crap--the cops can and do beat whoever they want to and cops dont need to be aggressive and violent either but they are far more then the protesters are

I do, fear not.
Hail ^5 :cool: and activate a friend

property is good but its meaningless if you lose all your freedoms

A true protestor will be aware of his or her surroudings.
Protestors that are peaceful will move for someone if they want through
respecting that persons right to space.

Protesting is a form of informing not aggressing.
Never protest high or drunk. Never talk ugly to a police officer and move if
they ask you to.

If you don't move your no different than an opressive religous group forcing your belief down they're throat.

Thats what encompasses the freedom of speech.
Its constantly being true to yourself and not punishing someone for
not believing the same thing as you.

and don't break peoples shit!

Uh, last I checked Bill O'Reilly is a commentator. That means he doesn't need to be Fair and Balanced(r) and can be as one-sided as he wants. Frankly I don't see the problem with FNC. Since news will never be completely objective, I think that the obvious conservative slant of Fox News pretty much balances out CNN, PBS, ABC, CBS, and NBC which arguably lean more toward the left.

Bottom line is, YOU have the power to change the channel. Don't like what you're seeing? Push a button and watch something else! It's called consumer freedom, and FNC has a format that's popular and making money, so more power to them. I WOULD be alarmed if FNC were the only news source out there, but it's not.

MoveOn and Robert Greenwald need to quit their whining and change the damn channel already.

Are you out of your fucking mind, or just stupid? CNN, ABC, CBS, and NBC liberal? What the fuck is wrong with you?

thats total crap--the cops can and do beat whoever they want to and cops dont need to be aggressive and violent either but they are far more then the protesters are
For one, if said protestor is breaking windows and looting store, lighting fires (Edmonton, Alberta "Canada Day Riot" July 2001; Over one million (CDN) in damages caused), if the police don't reprimand these radicals, when the hell will it stop? What other solution is there, do explain o' knowledgeable one.

Hah, yeah... Sadly, I don't know those days, but I'd like to see less court placed restrictions, etc. placed on the Police to restrict the efficiency of them being able to get their jobs done.
how long have you been a facist?

A true protestor will be aware of his or her surroudings.
Protestors that are peaceful will move for someone if they want through
respecting that persons right to space.

Protesting is a form of informing not aggressing.
Never protest high or drunk. Never talk ugly to a police officer and move if
they ask you to.

If you don't move your no different than an opressive religous group forcing your belief down they're throat.

Thats what encompasses the freedom of speech.
Its constantly being true to yourself and not punishing someone for
not believing the same thing as you.

and don't break peoples shit!

Exactly.

No. Unless the live ammo was CANDY!choclit hopefully :mp5:

Quote:
Originally Posted by MKULTRA
when a bad cop is acten up all the other cops cover for him instead of acten to stop the misconduct

Nobody covers up for each other, what, to lose their jobs. Turn of Lethal weapon for fuck's sake.

A true protestor will be aware of his or her surroudings.
Protestors that are peaceful will move for someone if they want through
respecting that persons right to space.

Protesting is a form of informing not aggressing.
Never protest high or drunk. Never talk ugly to a police officer and move if
they ask you to.

If you don't move your no different than an opressive religous group forcing your belief down they're throat.

Thats what encompasses the freedom of speech.
Its constantly being true to yourself and not punishing someone for
not believing the same thing as you.

and don't break peoples shit!


And if those police are the tools of a fascist regime? What then? Congratulate each other for doing what you're told and go home?

Are you out of your fucking mind, or just stupid? CNN, ABC, CBS, and NBC liberal? What the fuck is wrong with you?
your rite of course--another battle for the people is to takeback the airwaves

Hah, yeah... Sadly, I don't know those days, but I'd like to see less court placed restrictions, etc. placed on the Police to restrict the efficiency of them being able to get their jobs done.
Don't you just wish that all restrictions are lifted? So the cops can finally do their job efficiently. They should be able to do whatever it takes to get results. Without having to worry about silly things like the law. Just look at the Gestapo!!! They always got results. They didn't have to worry about legal consequenses. *sigh* Those were the days.

Facist!? Go straight to hell, do not pass go, do not collect $200. Recently in Alberta, a court ruling restricted the use of infrared cameras by helicopters to search for criminals on the run because it was deemed to invade the privacy of others by peering into homes.

For one, if said protestor is breaking windows and looting store, lighting fires (Edmonton, Alberta "Canada Day Riot" July 2001; Over one million (CDN) in damages caused), if the police don't reprimand these radicals, when the hell will it stop? What other solution is there, do explain o' knowledgeable one.
usally if a protest reaches this level its because the cops provoked the protesters into losing their tempers--police brutality is the trigger for 98% of protest riots

Facist!? Go straight to hell, do not pass go, do not collect $200. Recently in Alberta, a court ruling restricted the use of infrared cameras by helicopters to search for criminals on the run because it was deemed to invade the privacy of others by peering into homes.you should be very greatful that court acted to protect your privacy rights

usally if a protest reaches this level its because the cops provoked the protesters into losing their tempers--police brutality is the trigger for 98% of protest riots

I'd love to see this study of yours that proves all this BS nonsense. Have you even been in a violent protest?

usally if a protest reaches this level its because the cops provoked the protesters into losing their tempers--police brutality is the trigger for 98% of protest riots

Cite source.

you should be very greatful that court acted to protect your privacy rights

Indeed. The courts must always take precedence over the police.

I'd love to see this study of yours that proves all this BS nonsense. Have you even been in a violent protest?

I have. And the violence was indeed provoked by the bullish police.

I seriously hope someone, err... slips, and knocks you off a tall building onto a pile of sharp, rusty, metal blades. The Canada Day Riot was caused by drunken rowdies randomly destroying property and fighting with each other. When this erupted into a bigger escalade, meaning full destruction of a Dollar Store, then, the Police were called in. Don't fucking comment on things you know shit about and are too damn lazy to reasearch. Bloody asshole...

I'd love to see this study of yours that proves all this BS nonsense. Have you even been in a violent protest?
not yet but I plan on somehow making it into NYC this week--so Im sure one will happen because its what those in power want

I have. And the violence was indeed provoked by the bullish police.

Although the question was directed at Mkultra, when/where was this? Is there proof the police provoked the protesters? How did the police provoke the violence? What did the media say about it?

not yet but I plan on somehow making it into NYC this week--so Im sure one will happen because its what those in power want

So where is the study that says 98% of violent protests are caused by police?

Also, protect what fucking privacy? Infrared cameras do not "peer" into things, they simply trace the heat given off by them, it is ineffective to use them to see into buildings and are mostly used by the police to detect hiding car chase suspects and then aid ground units. You damn lefty 'soverign' rights activists make me so angry! Why don't you imagine a world without Police, and fucking see what that'd be like, no one to save your sorry ass when trouble calls.

I seriously hope someone, err... slips, and knocks you off a tall building onto a pile of sharp, rusty, metal blades. The Canada Day Riot was caused by drunken rowdies randomly destroying property and fighting with each other. When this erupted into a bigger escalade, meaning full destruction of a Dollar Store, then, the Police were called in. Don't fucking comment on things you know shit about and are too damn lazy to reasearch. Bloody asshole...
protests like these usally dont occur in police state amerikkka where people cant even get a permit to march in parks that supposedly belong to us

Also, protect what fucking privacy? Infrared cameras do not "peer" into things, they simply trace the heat given off by them, it is ineffective to use them to see into buildings and are mostly used by the police to detect hiding car chase suspects and then aid ground units. You damn lefty 'soverign' rights activists make me so angry! Why don't you imagine a world without Police, and fucking see what that'd be like, no one to save your sorry ass when trouble calls.
who protects us from the police?

Cite source.

Now.

What the hell do you mean, protect us from the Police. What do the Police hit you for no reason when you walk down the street, huh, do they pull you (yourself) out of a croud and stripsearch you with out reason. What the fuck is up your ass seriously, some cop spot the tin foil on your window and but you on your stash, huh, fucking grow up asshole. Cite precident to back yourself up, I'd really like to hear if you can back up your bullshit. Have you ever seen an NCAA riot, where the cops can't actually do anything, even though crazies set fires and raze structures, destroy cars, trees, etc. You have your head shoved so far up your ass... really...

Now.
ok brb

ok brb

This should be interesting....

*imagines which lefty-pinko-anarchist site Mkultra intends to use*

Although the question was directed at Mkultra, when/where was this? Is there proof the police provoked the protesters? How did the police provoke the violence? What did the media say about it?

http://www.dyne.org/antig8/text/sunday_times-article.html

So where is the study that says 98% of violent protests are caused by police?
http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=6904565&postcount=37

One man walking down the cobbled sidewalk with a bag of groceries in his arms suddenly stopped by a dark agent. He looks up terrified.

Thought Police Officer: Papers.

Man: (fumbles with her groceries and pulls out a pass book from his pockets. He hands it over with shaking hands) E-everything should be in order, sir.

The agent glances it over and looks at him.

TP Officer: What were you thinking about? A) Serving the President loyally. B) A communist uprising to over turn the ruling politic. C) Democratic reform promoting rule as stemming from the mandate of the people. Or D) The meaning of life.

Man: (blurts) A!

TP Officer: Is that your final answer?

Man: Yes, A! I serve the President loyally! I think of nothing else but serving for the glory of the US Empire.

TP Officer: Wrong answer.

Man: What? I mean D! I pick D!

TP Officer: Also wrong.

Man: (panicked) I-I-I don?t understand.

TP Officer: You were thinking! WE tell you what to think! You are guilty of a thought crime. Seize him!!!

http://www.dyne.org/antig8/text/sunday_times-article.html

That still does not show that the Police caused the violence. Yes it's sad what happened to the author, but this was in Italy. Perhaps the Italian police have different concepts then American police?

Fox News is not fair...lol

One man walking down the cobbled sidewalk with a bag of groceries in his arms suddenly stopped by a dark agent. He looks up terrified.

Thought Police Officer: Papers.

Man: (fumbles with her groceries and pulls out a pass book from his pockets. He hands it over with shaking hands) E-everything should be in order, sir.

The agent glances it over and looks at him.

TP Officer: What were you thinking about? A) Serving the President loyally. B) A communist uprising to over turn the ruling politic. C) Democratic reform promoting rule as stemming from the mandate of the people. Or D) The meaning of life.

Man: (blurts) A!

TP Officer: Is that your final answer?

Man: Yes, A! I serve the President loyally! I think of nothing else but serving for the glory of the US Empire.

TP Officer: Wrong answer.

Man: What? I mean D! I pick D!

TP Officer: Also wrong.

Man: (panicked) I-I-I don?t understand.

TP Officer: You were thinking! WE tell you what to think! You are guilty of a thought crime. Seize him!!!
Dont' delude yourself with stupid stories, if this person existed in such a place, he'd be persecuted for posting this anywhere.

Fox News is not fair...lol
Ah, the old 'lol' argument, huh. I tremble beneath the might of your argument.

Now.



http://www.dyne.org/antig8/text/sun...es-article.html

Funny, MKULTRA said he's going to NYC to be part of a violent protest because the Government want's one to happen. What the hell is that based on, how the hell would he know anything about the agenda of the Powers-that-be, fuck, turn off the Micheal Moore movies and quit thinking you're in the light of knowledge or whatever the fuck.

http://www.dyne.org/antig8/text/sun...es-article.html
Hehehehehehe ... not only did you steal this silly link from a previous poster, you didn't even steal it correctly. Dead link, bucko. Did you even read the story?

http://www.dyne.org/antig8/text/sun...es-article.html
The link doesn't work.

One man walking down the cobbled sidewalk with a bag of groceries in his arms suddenly stopped by a dark agent. He looks up terrified.

Thought Police Officer: Papers.

Man: (fumbles with her groceries and pulls out a pass book from his pockets. He hands it over with shaking hands) E-everything should be in order, sir.

The agent glances it over and looks at him.

TP Officer: What were you thinking about? A) Serving the President loyally. B) A communist uprising to over turn the ruling politic. C) Democratic reform promoting rule as stemming from the mandate of the people. Or D) The meaning of life.

Man: (blurts) A!

TP Officer: Is that your final answer?

Man: Yes, A! I serve the President loyally! I think of nothing else but serving for the glory of the US Empire.

TP Officer: Wrong answer.

Man: What? I mean D! I pick D!

TP Officer: Also wrong.

Man: (panicked) I-I-I don?t understand.

TP Officer: You were thinking! WE tell you what to think! You are guilty of a thought crime. Seize him!!!

LMMFAOOH!!!!!111!!!

Hehehehehehe ... not only did you steal this silly link from a previous poster, you didn't even steal it correctly. Dead link, bucko. Did you even read the story?I saw the frightening headlines but never forget the Miami police riot

So, this John Elliot is a whacko, duh. what, he takes pride in being destructive?

http://www.dyne.org/antig8/text/sunday_times-article.html

I'm not sure how both of you managed to misunderstand, but you did. I want you or MKULTRA to cite a reliable source stating that 98% of all protester violence is incited by police.

The link doesn't work.
it shows how cops in large groups act at protests

I saw the frightening headlines but never forget the Miami police riot
Truncheons rained down on me in the battle of Genoa
The Miami riot? You ARE a riot, MK.

Go directly to jail. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200.

hehehe ...

O'Reilly said that distracting the NYC police from protecting U.S. citizens, via violent protest, was "terrorist."

Well in this case, using that logic, aren't the Republicans terrorists? Having their convention in a city known to be very liberal is expected to create protests. Shouldn't the Republicans be thrown into Guantanamo for diverting the NYPD's man-power from crime-prevention to baby-sitting?

I'm not sure how both of you managed to misunderstand, but you did. I want you or MKULTRA to cite a reliable source stating that 98% of all protester violence is incited by police.
CS, you're gonna have to find some amusement in this recitation of bullshit statistics. They can't give you a source because, as you surely know, there is no source.

I don't even remember what the hell the topic is supposed to be. The 'facts' here are far more entertaining than Fox News, I'll give 'em that.

Well in this case, using that logic, aren't the Republicans terrorists? Having their convention in a city known to be very liberal is expected to create protests. Shouldn't the Republicans be thrown into Guantanamo for diverting the NYPD's man-power from crime-prevention to baby-sitting?
No, go fuck yourself.

CS, you're gonna have to find some amusement in this recitation of bullshit statistics. They can't give you a source because, as you surely know, there is no source.

I don't even remember what the hell the topic is supposed to be. The 'facts' here are far more entertaining than Fox News, I'll give 'em that.
I dont understand why CS is trying to kill a perfectly decent debate

THERE WAS NO MIAMI POLICE RIOT, I KNOW, I LIVE THERE.

Here's the story, the Police behaved good, the only activity was a guy getting pissed off and that's it. And that was not by the police, and don't tell me it's a vast right wing conspiracy, I saw it live, on mute. So please don't talk about anything unless you've lived it or have a reliable, unbiased source. God you radicals are crazy :rolleyes:

CS, you're gonna have to find some amusement in this recitation of bullshit statistics. They can't give you a source because, as you surely know, there is no source.

I don't even remember what the hell the topic is supposed to be. The 'facts' here are far more entertaining than Fox News, I'll give 'em that.

Oh, absolutely. I think it's hilarious. It's just so much more fun to call people on their statistics when you know they're invented.

Hes' not trying to kill anything. He's simply asking that you back up the bullshit 98% stat. you recited, and you of course, are failing miserably at the task at hand.

I dont understand why CS is trying to kill a perfectly decent debate

Less typing, more digging. You have a study to find.

Less typing, more digging. You have a study to find.
Haha, he does though.

THERE WAS NO MIAMI POLICE RIOT, I KNOW, I LIVE THERE.

Here's the story, the Police behaved good, the only activity was a guy getting pissed off and that's it. And that was not by the police, and don't tell me it's a vast right wing conspiracy, I saw it live, on mute. So please don't talk about anything unless you've lived it or have a reliable, unbiased source. God you radicals are crazy :rolleyes:
the corporate pig media hides police abuses of helpless demonstrators..I just heard Jello say on air america that when the cameras were away just after the critical mass protest the cops were beating people up behind the scenes

the corporate pig media hides police abuses of helpless demonstrators..I just heard Jello say on air america that when the cameras were away just after the critical mass protest the cops were beating people up behind the scenes

Maybe, maybe not ;)

You must realize something, my argument makes more sense because I live there. You are basing your argument off of left wing propaganda. Maybe I'm crazy, but people are more likely to believe me.

Hes' not trying to kill anything. He's simply asking that you back up the bullshit 98% stat. you recited, and you of course, are failing miserably at the task at hand.Im waiting to see if someone else has it first--research would take me longer to do then most people

the corporate pig media hides police abuses of helpless demonstrators..I just heard Jello say on air america that when the cameras were away just after the critical mass protest the cops were beating people up behind the scenes
What the fuck are you talking about?! Don't dis the media, how the hell else would you know about anything going on. Also, technically, the Jolt.co.uk forums are part of the media that you think is supposedly a "corporate pig". What's your IQ by the way?

Im waiting to see if someone else has it first--research would take me longer to do then most people
Ouch, I really thought you could come up with something better than that for an excuse, I guess not though.

the corporate pig media hides police abuses of helpless demonstrators..I just heard Jello say on air america that when the cameras were away just after the critical mass protest the cops were beating people up behind the scenes
Ah, the former leader of a punk band saw violence, did he? Did the cops also beat up the ambulance crews and prevent them from talking to the press? Did they roust all the injured and beatne people and dump them in the Guld of Mexico? Did nobody from the Miami press manage to sniff out this horrible tragedy that only one person somehow managed to see?

I'm sorry, I meant to tell you that I just happen to report for DemocracyNow and AirAmerica. Does that make me more credible? Do you believe me now?

Maybe, maybe not ;)

You must realize something, my argument makes more sense because I live there. You are basing your argument off of left wing propaganda. Maybe I'm crazy, but people are more likely to believe me.
how did you see it?

how did you see it?

I saw it as a peaceful protest, and that was kept peaceful by the police. They wore extra equipment for intimidation, now you must think "The People are being oppressed!" but think about it, if they weren't prepared, it would've been a riot, literally. And you would've blamed it on the Police. It was overall peaceful, with the occasional anarchist here and there.

And trust me, I don't see Fox, I see the Daily Show, only good news report place thing...

Ah, the former leader of a punk band saw violence, did he? Did the cops also beat up the ambulance crews and prevent them from talking to the press? Did they roust all the injured and beatne people and dump them in the Guld of Mexico? Did nobody from the Miami press manage to sniff out this horrible tragedy that only one person somehow managed to see?

I'm sorry, I meant to tell you that I just happen to report for DemocracyNow and AirAmerica. Does that make me more credible? Do you believe me now?
nope-cause im saying what people on democracynow and airmamerica are saying--you need to see the Fourth world war by indymedia

Im waiting to see if someone else has it first--research would take me longer to do then most people

Fair enough. Anyone else want to try and find a study showing that 98% of protest violence is caused by police?

Anyone?

Didn't think so.

I saw it as a peaceful protest, and that was kept peaceful by the police. They wore extra equipment for intimidation, now you must think "The People are being oppressed!" but think about it, if they weren't prepared, it would've been a riot, literally. And you would've blamed it on the Police. It was overall peaceful, with the occasional anarchist here and there.

And trust me, I don't see Fox, I see the Daily Show, only good news report place thing...the Daily Show is good--its part of the True Media

http://www.amnestyusa.org/rightsforall/police/nypd/

Please take the time to read it before commenting. It's so much nicer to argue with people that know the facts.

Fair enough. Anyone else want to try and find a study showing that 98% of protest violence is caused by police?

Anyone?

Didn't think so.
you didnt give them anough time to repsond

the Daily Show is good--its part of the True Media
That's something we can agree on :rolleyes:

I wonder, how old are you anyway? You've never answered that :P

http://www.nlg.org/npap/research_papers/researchpapersindex.htm

http://www.saxakali.com/CommunityLinkups/NYCBdEd4.htm

That's something we can agree on :rolleyes:

I wonder, how old are you anyway? You've never answered that :PI go to school

http://mipagina.americaonline.com.mx/__121b_lPZ5wX1SYwZwfPRI4Jc8gXOZLXcJ0mA0HiFl7ety9gA=

I go to school
I guess your age will remain a mystery just like how Stonehenge was made ;)

thanks Globes R Us, that should answer CS so that the flow of the debate can resume

Well I'm pulling out now, but before I leave, I must say something...

I AM SEXY

Good day!

I guess your age will remain a mystery just like how Stonehenge was made ;)I lerned the hard way that answering this question is the best way to get yourself typecasted-I dont want the debate to focus on who I am but on the issues that matter--and stonehenge was made by aliens everyone knows that ;)

Well I'm pulling out now, but before I leave, I must say something...

I AM SEXY

Good day!I can tell ;)
I prolly should pull out now too

http://www.mdcbowen.org/p2/bh/police_brutality_references.htm

thanks Globes R Us, that should answer CS so that the flow of the debate can resume
Nobody disputes that there is occasional police brutality. What they're disputing is the 98% figure.

Not one of those links shows any indication that 98% of all protester violence is incited by police. Isolated stories don't cut it.

Congratulations, Globes R us. You've conclusively proven that police brutality exists. Too bad no one was claiming it didn't.

Seriously. Your links, as far as I can tell, almost exclusively deal with excessive use of force in the apprehension of individual suspects, not with police inciting crowds to riot. I can read everything you linked if you want, but we'd all be better served if either you or MKULTRA would point out the report that states MK's 98% figure.

To give you an idea of my progress so far, I've read the Amnesty International report, which, as I said earlier, deals with police brutality against individuals, not entrapment of protest groups. I've read only the titles of the papers on the second page you linked (and I suspect you haven't read any further than I have), but none of them seem to be protest-related. The third link deals with the role of racial bias in excessive force incidents against individuals. The fourth deals with the case of one Leonardo Barquin, who was shot by a policeman, but not while engaging in any sort of protest.

In short, I'm afraid your links are largely irrelevant, but as I said before, feel free to point out which of them the 98% figure comes from.

Addendum to previous post: Your fifth link is a bibliography. You do realize a bibliography has to be associated with actual points to make any sense, don't you?

Nobody disputes that there is occasional police brutality. What they're disputing is the 98% figure.

Not one of those links shows any indication that 98% of all protester violence is incited by police. Isolated stories don't cut it.
why are you obsessing on that figure?

Congratulations, Globes R us. You've conclusively proven that police brutality exists. Too bad no one was claiming it didn't.

Seriously. Your links, as far as I can tell, almost exclusively deal with excessive use of force in the apprehension of individual suspects, not with police inciting crowds to riot. I can read everything you linked if you want, but we'd all be better served if either you or MKULTRA would point out the report that states MK's 98% figure.

To give you an idea of my progress so far, I've read the Amnesty International report, which, as I said earlier, deals with police brutality against individuals, not entrapment of protest groups. I've read only the titles of the papers on the second page you linked (and I suspect you haven't read any further than I have), but none of them seem to be protest-related. The third link deals with the role of racial bias in excessive force incidents against individuals. The fourth deals with the case of one Leonardo Barquin, who was shot by a policeman, but not while engaging in any sort of protest.

In short, I'm afraid your links are largely irrelevant, but as I said before, feel free to point out which of them the 98% figure comes from.


I never stated that statistic. It is aimed the links at those who blindly support the police, not understanding that police brutality is part of their culture.

Addendum to previous post: Your fifth link is a bibliography. You do realize a bibliography has to be associated with actual points to make any sense, don't you?
if you search the bibliography it can prly be useful

Back to the original point of this thread.
FoxNews reported that the little fire during the protest was a paper-mache(sp?) dragon. I know that because I was watching FoxNews at the time. Where is the misrepresentation?

"True Media" huh, wow, people are so damn paranoid.

"True Media" huh, wow, people are so damn paranoid.

Hehe, reminds me of the Nazi usage of "Aryan Science".

I never stated that statistic. It is aimed the links at those who blindly support the police, not understanding that police brutality is part of their culture.
Police brutality is not part of quote-on-quote Police Culture. Seriously, pull your head out of your ass and observe the real world for a change.

why are you obsessing on that figure?
It could have something to do with the statistics you so blithely quoted in one of those reports you so painfully pulled out of your ass.

Fact is, MKULTRA, you don't debate. You toss bullshit on the table and expect us to take it at face value. I have ten time more respect for Globes R US, even though the research he did was irrelevant to the question asked.

If you don't have anything to back up your bullshit, I'd appreciate it if you stayed out of the 'debate', as you call it. A debate consists of each side presenting facts and integrating it into a position. Globes R Us has been debating. You are babbling.

lol @ "police brutality".

Let me tell you a story. An armed security guard gets punched in the face by a burgler with knuckledusters on. This causes a lot of pain and extensive injuries to the guard's face, and she goes unconcious from the shock. The robber then breaks into and steals from the property. As he is making his getaway, the security guard comes to and fires a warning shot. This warning shot accidentally hits the criminal, killing him instantly.

Shortly after the guard gets admitted to hospital, the police try to interrogate her; and then she gets charged with murder.

True story. The point is: The Police are so highly regulated that any "abuse" gets dealt with in the harshest way possible; even if the "brutality" was actually just the police officer trying to restrain an armed suspect.

Of course I'm not fucking saying that the Police should be able to do as they please. I would just like less regulation, so the police who risk their lives for us can do their job without having to worry about their actions being misconstrued as "brutality" or "victim abuse". And the same should go for security guards: If they are assaulted while on duty, they should be allowed to use their sidearm to defend themselves. It is not murder if it is done as self-defence and in the line of duty.

Police brutality is not part of quote-on-quote Police Culture. Seriously, pull your head out of your ass and observe the real world for a change.

I manage to observe the real world very well thanks. But your advice and its wording does at least allow me to see the type of person with whom I'm dealing. I myself, stick to facts and leave insults to the ignorant.

Police officials are NOT held strictly accountable for questionable conduct towards citizens. Those of you how continue to espouse and perpetuate this false notion should study the concept of "qualified immunity" under both the U.S. federal law and the laws of most states. This doctrine protects government officials from legal responsibility from even the most egregious acts so long as it was performed in the context and scope of their official duties and was "reasonable" under the circumstances.

The courts of the U.S. and state governments have steadily expanded the meaning of "reasonable" to include shootings of unarmed suspects (where police allege they "thought" the person was armed---including shootings in the back of fleeing suspects), beating of suspects (read: resisting arrest) and arrest of misidentified citizens (read: we arrested and charged the wrong person.)

Once you read the types and examples of police misconduct protected under the doctrine of "qualified immunity," your opinion about governmental oversight of police officials in the US may change substantially.

if you search the bibliography it can prly be useful

It doesn't link to anything. I hate to disappoint you, but I'm not going to print out the bibliography and drive down I-35 to the Perry-Castañeda Library at 11:00 at night just so I can do your research for you.

Back to the original point of this thread.
FoxNews reported that the little fire during the protest was a paper-mache(sp?) dragon. I know that because I was watching FoxNews at the time. Where is the misrepresentation?
it sounds like foxnews liars are trying to moderate their stance and report the truth for once cause they know THE WHOLE WORLD IS WATCHING

it sounds like foxnews liars are trying to moderate their stance and report the truth for once cause they know THE WHOLE WORLD IS WATCHING

And people weren't watching before the RNC? Get a clue.

It could have something to do with the statistics you so blithely quoted in one of those reports you so painfully pulled out of your ass.

Fact is, MKULTRA, you don't debate. You toss bullshit on the table and expect us to take it at face value. I have ten time more respect for Globes R US, even though the research he did was irrelevant to the question asked.

If you don't have anything to back up your bullshit, I'd appreciate it if you stayed out of the 'debate', as you call it. A debate consists of each side presenting facts and integrating it into a position. Globes R Us has been debating. You are babbling.
well thats ONE way of debating but the overall message of what Im sayin has been proven correct-so why obsess on the details that dont disprove it?

well thats ONE way of debating but the overall message of what Im sayin has been proven correct-so why obsess on the details that dont disprove it?

How has it been proven correct? You've yet to show that even a simple majority of protest violence is caused by police.

lol @ "police brutality".

Let me tell you a story. An armed security guard gets punched in the face by a burgler with knuckledusters on. This causes a lot of pain and extensive injuries to the guard's face, and she goes unconcious from the shock. The robber then breaks into and steals from the property. As he is making his getaway, the security guard comes to and fires a warning shot. This warning shot accidentally hits the criminal, killing him instantly.

Shortly after the guard gets admitted to hospital, the police try to interrogate her; and then she gets charged with murder.

True story. The point is: The Police are so highly regulated that any "abuse" gets dealt with in the harshest way possible; even if the "brutality" was actually just the police officer trying to restrain an armed suspect.

Of course I'm not fucking saying that the Police should be able to do as they please. I would just like less regulation, so the police who risk their lives for us can do their job without having to worry about their actions being misconstrued as "brutality" or "victim abuse". And the same should go for security guards: If they are assaulted while on duty, they should be allowed to use their sidearm to defend themselves. It is not murder if it is done as self-defence and in the line of duty.
your rite in cases like this of course--then theres always the story of Amadou Diallo...

well thats ONE way of debating but the overall message of what Im sayin has been proven correct-so why obsess on the details that dont disprove it?
What overall message? That the cops have overstepped they're bounds before? That is not disputed. What I want you to prove is that most violent protests and riots are the fault of the police and not out of control protestors.

your rite in cases like this of course--then theres always the story of Amadou Diallo...

Definitely an indictment of the entire force of the NYPD.

It doesn't link to anything. I hate to disappoint you, but I'm not going to print out the bibliography and drive down I-35 to the Perry-Castañeda Library at 11:00 at night just so I can do your research for you.
Itll turn up

well thats ONE way of debating but the overall message of what Im sayin has been proven correct-so why obsess on the details that dont disprove it?
Inventing 'facts' and then getting all huffy dosen't constitute debate anywhere, MKULTRA. I doubt anyone on your side of the debate would disagree with that statement. As it happens, I'm not even opposed to what the left has been saying. All I've done in this topic is make fun of idiots spouting irrational 'facts'.

Congratulations, MK. You've just made someone else's Ignore List.

Definitely an indictment of the entire force of the NYPD.
correct

correct

How do I add someone to my ignore list?

What overall message? That the cops have overstepped they're bounds before? That is not disputed. What I want you to prove is that most violent protests and riots are the fault of the police and not out of control protestors.
Its proven as the facts emerge but Im glad we can all agree on the problematic role of police at these types of expression events in the meantime--no stat can change that ugly reality

How do I add someone to my ignore list?
Click on their name, view their Public Profile, follow the prompts.

Click on their name, go to their profile, follow the prompts.

I feel much better.

Inventing 'facts' and then getting all huffy dosen't constitute debate anywhere, MKULTRA. I doubt anyone on your side of the debate would disagree with that statement. As it happens, I'm not even opposed to what the left has been saying. All I've done in this topic is make fun of idiots spouting irrational 'facts'.

Congratulations, MK. You've just made someone else's Ignore List.
ignore is such a persuavive way to make a point afterall

How do I add someone to my ignore list?
ask the mods

Its proven as the facts emerge...

Interesting you should mention facts. I don't think you've given us any yet.

...but Im glad we can all agree on the problematic role of police at these types of expression events in the meantime--no stat can change that ugly reality

The role of police at such events is to keep them from getting out of hand. I fail to see what's "problematic" or "ugly" about that.

Interesting you should mention facts. I don't think you've given us any yet.



The role of police at such events is to keep them from getting out of hand. I fail to see what's "problematic" or "ugly" about that.

Indeed.

You seem to be talking yourself in circles, MKULTRA. I fail to see the logic in your arguments or your statistics (in fact, I fail to see your statistics at all!).

Indeed.

You seem to be talking yourself in circles, MKULTRA. I fail to see the logic in your arguments or your statistics (in fact, I fail to see your statistics at all!).
lol didnt one of your puppets just ignore me? or are you both the puppets? this is gettin confusing

Uh, just to speak up a bit.

I've been in a few protests, and in one or two of them, there was the obligatory Guy Who Starts Shit.

Thankfully, in both cases, enough protesters were level headed enough to take him and remove him from the area.

Surprisingly enough, in one case, they turned out to be a major Bush supporter.


Several times, during a planned protest, a sympethizer from the side being protested will go in and try to make things worst. Ever hear of a town called Poughkeepsie? Someone was going around, groping women's breasts, sexually assulting them, and giving out Kerry stickers.

Turns out, he was a hard core republican doing it to discredit Kerry.

People are not afraid to use very dirty tactics in order to win. That's what happens at most protests that turn violent-one or a small group of people decide to push their private agenda at the cost of the entire protest. Weither by police, protester, or sympathizer.

Whats to misrepresent, they look like a bunch of candy ass monkey suits, this is going to hurt John Kerry you know.

I still say that every time the whackjobs start destroying property, the U.S Army should go Tiananmen Square on their collective asses.

You have no idea how close the parallel would be between the two situations.

What happened on early hours of 4th of June, 1989 in Beijing was a bunch of hard-liner conservatives (they aren't true Communists, or Socialists even) trying to hold onto power by literally crushing the voice of patriotic young people who weren't afraid to act in the best interest of their home nation.

So, the current unelected regime in the White House sends the nearest armoured division into its largest metropolitan area to crush what it sees as a threat to its continual hold on power. From then on, the US Government would be hypocritical to accuse other Soverign nations of 'Human Rights Abuses'.

Heck, even the Tiananman rebellion leaders had a trial (overseen by a neutral Indian and Belgian delegates for fairness). One even got off on home detention. The Bush Regime would throw the organisers into a jail cell without trial by jury of peers under the so-called 'Patriot Act'.

JiangGuo

You have no idea how close the parallel would be between the two situations.

What happened on early hours of 4th of June, 1989 in Beijing was a bunch of hard-liner conservatives (they aren't true Communists, or Socialists even) trying to hold onto power by literally crushing the voice of patriotic young people who weren't afraid to act in the best interest of their home nation.

So, the current unelected regime in the White House sends the nearest armoured division into its largest metropolitan area to crush what it sees as a threat to its continual hold on power. From then on, the US Government would be hypocritical to accuse other Soverign nations of 'Human Rights Abuses'.

Heck, even the Tiananman rebellion leaders had a trial (overseen by a neutral Indian and Belgian delegates for fairness). One even got off on home detention. The Bush Regime would throw the organisers into a jail cell without trial by jury of peers under the so-called 'Patriot Act'.

JiangGuo
:rolleyes: Yes because in America noone gets a free trial, where do you live anyway?

O'Reilly said that distracting the NYC police from protecting U.S. citizens, via violent protest, was "terrorist."
take off the rose colored republican goggles

he was calling the people protesting terrorists because they are protesting the GOP.

he has said befoire those people who disagree with the GOP agenda are terrorists and un-patriotic. not that exactly but he has said that for various things that he agrees with. when the hell did o'reilly become the great king of america and able to judge who is and isnt patriotic or even american, more republican hypocrisy

take off the rose colored republican goggles

he was calling the people protesting terrorists because they are protesting the GOP.

he has said befoire those people who disagree with the GOP agenda are terrorists and un-patriotic. not that exactly but he has said that for various things that he agrees with. when the hell did o'reilly become the great king of america and able to judge who is and isnt patriotic or even american, more republican hypocrisy

OH please. He called those who use VIOLENT protest terrorists. Stop putting words in his mouth.

You have no idea how close the parallel would be between the two situations.

What happened on early hours of 4th of June, 1989 in Beijing was a bunch of hard-liner conservatives (they aren't true Communists, or Socialists even) trying to hold onto power by literally crushing the voice of patriotic young people who weren't afraid to act in the best interest of their home nation.

So, the current unelected regime in the White House sends the nearest armoured division into its largest metropolitan area to crush what it sees as a threat to its continual hold on power. From then on, the US Government would be hypocritical to accuse other Soverign nations of 'Human Rights Abuses'.

Heck, even the Tiananman rebellion leaders had a trial (overseen by a neutral Indian and Belgian delegates for fairness). One even got off on home detention. The Bush Regime would throw the organisers into a jail cell without trial by jury of peers under the so-called 'Patriot Act'.

JiangGuo

I really hope you're just responding to Tyrandis, and don't actually believe such a thing is likely to happen.

when the hell did o'reilly become the great king of america and able to judge who is and isnt patriotic or even american, more republican hypocrisy

Hmm. I don't know. Maybe about the same time the Republicans claimed to own the Presidential Seal.

Not only was I at the march, I ended up about 20 yards or so in front of the dragon at the moment it caught fire, and saw not only that, but the resulting crowd reaction.

Earlier in this thread, someone mentioned that there can be People Who Start Shit at protests. The group with the dragon definitely was such; however, it appeared they were a straightforward anarchist group rather than people on the GOP payroll, as was implied. Once or twice they had taken over such call-and-response chants as "What do we want - PEACE!" by shouting back, "What do we want - ANARCHY!" Yes, the police responded to them after the dragon caught fire -- but police were responding more to the fact that this one particular group was trying to interfere with their actually putting the fire out. So those who are claiming police overreaction here -- folks, the protestors in question started it.

On the OTHER hand. This one group was such a SMALL part of the entire march that to typify the entire march as violent is ludicrous. In fact, I spoke with a couple other people who were in the very same march that knew nothing whatsoever about what had happened -- because they were further back in the crowd, and the whole thing had been settled so quickly, by both cops AND protestors working TOGETHER, that the situation was over by the time they reached Madison Square Garden. Most of the people around me who HAD seen it, even, were critical of their actions.

The whole protest actually drew praise from both NYC Police commissioners and from Mayor Bloomberg for sticking to a pledge to be non-violent; the small group that did stir stuff up was seen as the exception.

So yes, there were people who were there to stir stuff up, and it is unfair of accusing police of unnecessary force. However, it is also unfair to gauge the entire march based on the actions of what was ultimately a VERY select few. I hope those reading Bill O'Reilly's comments make VERY careful distinction between the people who were causing trouble, and the people who weren't, because the former group was VERY small (two or three dozen people out of, what, half a million?).

Yes, I know 250 people were ultimately arrested. I saw only 3 dozen at the dragon - others were arrested at later "post-march" demonstrations after the fact.

Okay, speaking as someone who was THERE.
All you have is an eyewitness account? Oh dear, not good enough. Please go find at least three websites from opposition sources that agree with you wholeheartedly and in identical detail.

We must have standards here, after all.

CNN actually. Unfortunately for you, the actions of the NYPD are accountable to the city of New York. The nutcase protestors don't answer to anybody, therefore they are more likely to provoke violence than the police.

Your country was spearheaded by 'nutcase protestors', lest ye forget.

And are urging people not only to turn off foxnews but to call them up and demand that they act fair and balanced. For those of you who still dont think Foxnews doesnt have an extremist bias then maybe you can explain why Bill O'Lielly is calling patriotic dissenters "terrorists"
*btw that thing burning in front of MSG was a papier mache dragon

Protesters will say anything.

Thus negating the any meaning of this thread.

Anyone pissing off the police should be hauled to a nearby cargo ship, and dropped into the hold for the duration of the convention.

They should also be fined $20000 and have an felony conviction for terrorism placed on their record.

If you're simply going to spout nonsense, I have a right to my nonsense as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pan-Arab Israel
CNN actually. Unfortunately for you, the actions of the NYPD are accountable to the city of New York. The nutcase protestors don't answer to anybody, therefore they are more likely to provoke violence than the police.



Your country was spearheaded by 'nutcase protestors', lest ye forget.

Yes, and "nutcase protestors" that win are called "nation founders", as it should be.

And "nutcase protestors" that lose are called "criminals", as it should be.

You gotta problem with 'at..!?

OH please. He called those who use VIOLENT protest terrorists. Stop putting words in his mouth.
why has the hypocritical unpatriotic O'reilly never condemned the terrorism of police brutality?

true--there was even a case of a plainclothes person using a tazor gun on other protesters and he then went behind police lines--he was clearly an undercover cop provoking violence

Here we go again.....one week was not long enough was it? LOL

Yes, and "nutcase protestors" that win are called "nation founders", as it should be.

And "nutcase protestors" that lose are called "criminals", as it should be.

You gotta problem with 'at..!?
"nutcase protesters" founded america

Here we go again.....one week was not long enough was it? LOL
I yield not-I fight :mp5: :sniper: :mp5:

why has the hypocritical unpatriotic O'reilly never condemned the terrorism of police brutality?
When it's been proven that the police behaved unconscionably, O'Reilly condemned it. He just doesn't automatically assume the police are at fault like you seem to enjoy to.

When it's been proven that the police behaved unconscionably, O'Reilly condemned it. He just doesn't automatically assume the police are at fault like you seem to enjoy to.
you seem to miss the fact o'reilly is a pompous right wing wind bag who would be calling them terrorists and unAmerican if they were just sitting on mall grass chanting "No more bush!" and eating ice cream

you seem to miss the fact o'reilly is a pompous right wing wind bag who would be calling them terrorists and unAmerican if they were just sitting on mall grass chanting "No more bush!" and eating ice cream
Riiiiiight. Next?

true--there was even a case of a plainclothes person using a tazor gun on other protesters and he then went behind police lines--he was clearly an undercover cop provoking violence

And? You've yet to prove that such incidents are the rule, or even a common exception to it.

you seem to miss the fact o'reilly is a pompous right wing wind bag who would be calling them terrorists and unAmerican if they were just sitting on mall grass chanting "No more bush!" and eating ice cream

Exactly... except that he wouldn't. I'm sorry, sir, you are not a winner. We do have some lovely parting gifts for you, though.

Exactly... except that he wouldn't. I'm sorry, sir, you are not a winner. We do have some lovely parting gifts for you, though.
yet, he would. he declared anyone who opposed the iraqi war is un-american and un-patriotic

Im waiting to see if someone else has it first--research would take me longer to do then most people
What the F--k are you talking about? *You* referred to studies having been done that showed that most cops were wife-beaters etc etc, this would mean
a)You have already done the research and are about to reference your multiple sources (after all you said studies and not study) or
b)You are a brazen liar

What the F--k are you talking about? *You* referred to studies having been done that showed that most cops were wife-beaters etc etc, this would mean
a)You have already done the research and are about to reference your multiple sources (after all you said studies and not study) or
b)You are a brazen liar
no I just have an excellent memory and retain these things but dont remember the sources

What else would you expect from Rupert Murdoch's republifascist asshat?

If that person performs as disasterously as George, then he too should feel the wrath of the people.


As long as it's on pay-per-view!! Maybe it will get the country out of debt!

I disagree with what Peetor2 said on page 2. CNN, in my opinion, is putting a lot more attention, commentator power and advertisements towards the RNC than they did to the DNC.

yet, he would. he declared anyone who opposed the iraqi war is un-american and un-patriotic
I don't know where you get this. I watch O'Reilly a lot and never heard this. I could be wrong. I don't memorize the shows. If you can find a transcript, go head and prove me wrong.

How about I tell you that Fox is the most bias of all news groups. I continue to say that EVERY news group is bias in one way or another. Fox just happens to be the only one bias towards the right, instead of the typical left.

You're absolutely blind if you can't see it when you look at them and compare.

-Fury

total waste of your time, thus far all the protesters have been far more peaceful and no hassle at all to any one then they ever expected. So, if the next 4 days are like the last two.. I don't think any one has any thing to worry about. There has been NO violence at all. A few naked people got arrested on Saturday, that's the biggest trouble they've had :cool:

no I just have an excellent memory and retain these things but dont remember the sources
Yeah right. In Mkultra land a sign of excellent memory is an inability to remember sources. Maybe people would respect you more if you just admitted you occasionally make shit up , eh? *sigh*

There has been NO violence at all.

Maybe not, but 98% of it was caused by the police. ;)

But seriously, I'm glad to hear that.

total waste of your time, thus far all the protesters have been far more peaceful and no hassle at all to any one then they ever expected. So, if the next 4 days are like the last two.. I don't think any one has any thing to worry about. There has been NO violence at all. A few naked people got arrested on Saturday, that's the biggest trouble they've had :cool:
C-SPAN / ABC local-NY was saying something like 529 arrests over the weekend, but none as of 6 PM today. Tomorrow is supposed to be a big Civil Disobedience day, at least according to the organizers they spoke with.

Yeah right. In Mkultra land a sign of excellent memory is an inability to remember sources. Maybe people would respect you more if you just admitted you occasionally make shit up , eh? *sigh*
I do but its still true

There has been NO violence at all. A few naked people got arrested on Saturday, that's the biggest trouble they've had.

Have you heard about the dragon incident at yesterday's march? There were some arrests from that, most of them stemming from when the police tried to arrest one of the group that set the fire and other members of that group started throwing bottles at the cops. And yes, other members of that group did do that.

C-SPAN / ABC local-NY was saying something like 529 arrests over the weekend, but none as of 6 PM today. Tomorrow is supposed to be a big Civil Disobedience day, at least according to the organizers they spoke with.

At the actual march yesterday, there was only a handful of arrests -- a handful connected with the dragon, and then another bunch involving bicyclists who blocked traffic at intersections not on the parade route. There were also some "post-demonstration" incidents with people pestering delegates at their hotels.

The POSITIVE thing I heard was, there were a lot of protestors who went up to Central Park, even though the permit had been refused. A number of cops were stationed there as well. But -- nothing happened. Some protestors gathered in clusters and held signs, others just sort of sat around. A couple cops admitted to protest organizers that technically groups of 20 people were supposed to have applied for a permit, but they weren't going to bother enforcing it if there wasn't any trouble. So the groups of protestors and the cops all ended up just sort of...hanging out for the night.

So how do the right-wingers here react to the fact that only 12 people were arrested for violence in a protest of 400,000? And they didn't even have a permit to march! The NYPD chief stated on CNN that they weren't going to give people permit troubles.

Show me what democracy looks like!

So how do the right-wingers here react to the fact that only 12 people were arrested for violence in a protest of 400,000? And they didn't even have a permit to march! The NYPD chief stated on CNN that they weren't going to give people permit troubles.

Show me what democracy looks like!

Well, as the official spokesperson for all "right-wingers," I can categorically state that we are all pleased with this outcome.

Any other questions? :rolleyes: