It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Greven
"A anti anticapitalista"
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Greven
The daily beast did a decent job of trying to dissect this video. They were able to put a fair bit of circumstantial (their word, I agree with it) evidence that it likely happened, but nothing concrete. They contacted one of the more militant protest groups who, from what I can recall, didn't take ownership of this particular march but didn't really deny it either. It was really more of "don't recall that" response.
I would suggest that as the group was facing away, and moving away, toward the end of the video the sound can be expected to diminish in volume fairly quickly. Same reason you can hear a siren coming towards you longer than you can hear it moving away from you.
I do agree that there are some strange circumstances around the video, but I'm not ready to call shenanigans yet.
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Kali74
I do agree with you in not seeing why an anti-capitalism chant would've been included in their "playlist" of chants. All the more so with no apparent segue into it, just a completely abrupt transition.
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Kali74
My last response to you was in regards to you not answering the question I asked a while ago.
I do agree with you in not seeing why an anti-capitalism chant would've been included in their "playlist" of chants. All the more so with no apparent segue into it, just a completely abrupt transition.
originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Bloodydagger
More like trying to make protesters look bad such as the video we've been discussing the last several posts.
originally posted by: TechUnique
You've done something like this in the past? Really?
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Kali74
K. The comment I replied to wanted them "in trouble" and not just suspended.
So whatever LE personnel were in that room should be "called out" for...what? Another person's actions? Speech?
originally posted by: Kali74
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Kali74
K. The comment I replied to wanted them "in trouble" and not just suspended.
So whatever LE personnel were in that room should be "called out" for...what? Another person's actions? Speech?
Found it faster than I thought... just that to me it seems reflective of a mentality SOME cops have.