Does this look like America to you?

page: 12
93
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 27 2009 @ 07:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpacePunk
Well, there's only one good thing that will come out of this. The use of sonic weapons on protestors will only work once. Good earplugs will make them useless the next go around.


No, you can crank LRADS up and earplugs don't matter.




posted on Sep, 27 2009 @ 08:55 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


I assuredly am not as well written and eloquent as you sir, and it is definitely nice to read well written and thought out posts.

i did not watch the transpirings of the events blow by blow. So, indeed my opinions on the events are only what i've read for myself. which, limits my overall knowledge of all that transpired. oh and... don't make assumptions
i think my rights extend so far as they do not infringe upon you or yours. Although, infringement is a subjective criterion.

The constitution is a bad thing? wow...low blow, why must the extreme ends always rear the ugly head in discussions of point proving. i think it's great...so great i gave a little service time of my own free will.

Do i agree with the severity of the equipment used? no (disagree with where some of the equipment was used too)
Do i agree with the decline of our freedoms? no
Is the government as a whole infringing in areas they shouldn't? yes
in the spirit of ATS...the dumpster rolling gang as being undercover operative thereby giving the grounds to begin more forceful police measures...now that is a topic for discussion!

I don't exactly believe in compliance, though i don't believe in stalwart non-compliance either. there is a balance unless situationally you need to tip to one side or the other. i feel that the federal government needs less power, less size. probably a little more power back to the states. though that drifts off topic. this is a full circle thread with good posts and observations throughout. though those that tend to discredit others with so much acid tend to ruffle my feathers. throwing accusations isn't discussion


I disagree with police brutality. I've not been direct witness to it, nor have i been a victim. I think officers that go to the extreme in cases where the level of force wasn't necessary should be either fired put in jail or at least suspended for a signifigant duration of time. who feels comfortable approaching a cop with a credible grievance or complaint when the attitude of said cop isn't that of someone there to help.



posted on Sep, 27 2009 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Griever0311

Originally posted by SpacePunk
Well, there's only one good thing that will come out of this. The use of sonic weapons on protestors will only work once. Good earplugs will make them useless the next go around.


No, you can crank LRADS up and earplugs don't matter.


If they have to crank it up that high, the earplugs the officers use won't matter either. It'll level the playing field.

As far as microwave guns go, I'm sure there'll be some sort of resistant clothing. Tin foil, perhaps. I've also been considering that since it's a wave form, there should be a way to counter it, and either collapse it within an area or simply render it non-effective.

[edit on 27-9-2009 by SpacePunk]



posted on Sep, 27 2009 @ 10:36 PM
link   
reply to post by eodbrad
 


The very best way to assure a repeat performance of what transpired in Pittsburgh and perhaps even more severe ones is to not condemn the Police abuses for exactly what they are.

Attempting to defend these unlawful actions by government authorities who not only issued these orders, but purchased and assembled these devices to use upon civilians, as well as recruiting thousands of law enforcement officers from 8 surrounding states and calling on National Guard troops from two surrounding states is the surest way to encourage future such abuses of power, infringements upon constitutional rights, and exorbitant and wasteful cost and expense all charged to the tax payer and the citizen.

When the police fired these weapons and munitions into unarmed non-violent groups of protestors lawfully assembled that did so on, the premise that every one involved was guilty of something by closeness of proximity.

In other words innocence no longer matters and you are no longer innocent until proven guilty and punishment need not wait for a court of law it need simply meted out by the push of a button, the squeeze of a trigger, the flip of a switch and the pulling of a canister’s opening.

The sad truth is that anyone who finds that remotely acceptable, possibly defendable under any circumstance short of clear and imminent danger of great bodily harm and death, is in fact guilty of the most dangerous and inhuman form of indifference and apathy and neglect.

The truth is there was no imminent danger of great bodily harm or death to anyone or even of great physical harm to anyone’s property.

These actions on the part of the Police are so reprehensible, degrading, and repugnant that there is no possible defense for them, and only someone derelict in their responsibilities as a freedom loving American or working with deliberate purpose to rob Americans of their freedoms and dignity could possibly defend these atrocities.

Yes the Police deserve the same constitutional protection they robbed their brutalized victims of. They deserve to be considered innocent until found guilty in a court of law, but anyone who feels it is responsible to defend the indefensible and blatant abuse of Power is in fact as guilty in their own dereliction in a very similar but ultimately just as foreboding and potentially lethal way as the Police were in their own dereliction of duty to the Constitution and their Oaths of Office and to the Constitution.

Yes these Police Officers deserve a defense, and if they can not afford an attorney one will be appointed for them through their Police Benevolence Unions, but I for one can simply not imagine any Constitution and freedom loving American defending these actions and consider any who would either grossly and purposefully naïve or deliberately and intentionally malignant.
Extreme, our Constitutional freedoms and privileges are nothing to be trifled with, and when they are in a blatantly egregious manner, the best way to continually and permanently loose these freedoms and privileges is to not defend them to the extreme in the extreme.

Otherwise America ceases to be America and it shant be long before you or I or all of us find ourselves facing the same dangers from those charged and paid to protect us in our person and property upon our own streets visiting indiscriminate violence upon us for the mere sake of their own total and absolute control and desire to have total and absolute control.

Extreme is warranted in such a violation, defense of the indefensible is not. Protection of the rights of the offenders is defendable, regardless of the fact that they abused their power and authority and trampled upon others.

The only thing that makes America’s constitutional principals work is by always applying them to the hard to defend and indefensible and innocent alike.

Our constitutional rights are only as strong as the citizen’s determination to never let them be trampled upon or taken away.

There is no excuse ever for a lack of resolve in this regard.



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 02:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Longtimegone



The march began with several hundred protesters. It did not have a city permit and police declared it an unlawful assembly.


source: news.sky.com...

Why do you need a permit. What happened to the 1st amendments? Someone please explain what happened to the U.S.


This happened to the US, and it is happening in Europe as well.

You better get in your free speech zone

The One World Government is upon us all.

Most ppl made fun of it, thought it was a load of tripe, but it appears
the conspiracy ppl have been right a number of times.

Conspiracies that were true

There are a few missing from that list, but it is not my list so it
will make due as a foundation for the others that we know.

This is just another step on the road to the end of the US and the
beginning of the NAU.

Something we have known is coming for awhile and has been
spoken about on mainstream TV for years.

It was a joke or baloney, but it is all too real now.

And it is all too late.

I have made my plans clear, the sheep won't save you, the
sheep won't have your back.

Hell most neighbors don't have your back.

Once it starts ppl will turn on each other just like they did in
the 1930's in Germany.

Anyone that has a grudge against another will turn them in falsely
just to see them gone.

We are on the verge of disaster, and most are still blissfully unaware.

Good Luck to you all !

[edit on 28-9-2009 by Ex_MislTech]



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 03:14 AM
link   
Fortress Pittsburgh


Since midnight Wednesday, automobiles have been prevented from entering Pittsburgh's downtown business district. The only vehicles one can find downtown are ominous-looking unmarked black sedans with DC plates, silver minivans with uniformed officers inside and marked police cars. Pedestrians and cyclists can enter downtown through three checkpoints, presided over by National Guard soldiers--usually lingering around dark green Humvees--and out-of-town police officers.

Concrete barriers line the sidewalks; and, surrounding the Convention Center, where the G-20 meetings are taking place, tall steel fencing has been erected behind which semi-trailers are lined front to back.

And then there are the police--lots of police: county sheriffs, local cops, state troopers, National Guard soldiers and men in dark suits who drive those ominous sedans. Police from Chicago guarded several checkpoints I visited.
This is what $19 million spent over two days has brought Pittsburgh--a tightly controlled, heavily militarized city center with little sign of protest. Shopping and fawning over the spectacle of the G-20 summit are the only activities that don't provoke suspicion by the hordes of law enforcement.

As I biked around downtown, workers on lunch break relaxed, some strolling through the near-empty streets. Some took pictures of the police as they filed by on foot or on horseback.

I spoke with two city workers who were heading back to their office after lunch. What did they think of the protesters? "We haven't seen any," said one. And this is precisely the point of all the security measures--out of sight, out of sound from the Conference Center. "It's a police state downtown," said Witold Walczak, state director of the ACLU…

… Pittsburgh residents "got the [SNIP] end of the stick," Levi Miller, 53, told me. The city put up $19 million to host the summit, $10 million of which came from the federal government and $4 million from Pennsylvania, with the city responsible for the remaining $5 million. "Why couldn't they teleconference?" Miller asked of the world leaders. "We've got National Guard, police from Florida and other cities, but Pittsburgh's broke. What about the ghettos; what about the homeless, the food banks?" Asked what he thought of the protesters, Miller responded, "Let 'em protest. Why shouldn't they be able to? They've got a right to say what they think of the G-20." Miller, who works as a coal passer shoveling out ash in a coal-fired boiler room, held the hand of his young granddaughter. They were going to a baseball game at PNC Park, home of the Pittsburgh Pirates, which sits across the Allegheny River from downtown. The sight of baseball fans heading to a game amid the checkpoints, ranks of law enforcement and National Guard--and the lack of protesters--gave the militarized scene a bizarre twist.



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 03:50 AM
link   
That is sick! I started another thread and didn't check into this forum.

There are several examples of this happening. I hope your country
gets angry, and stands up soon. This is not a good sign.

Looking in from the outside,
Tino

Ontario. Canada.



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 06:38 AM
link   
reply to post by kosmicjack
 


I had to laugh at this one, ATS is off the hook now.

This guy is standing in the street with a bullhorn. Are you allowed to do that in your city?

You aren't.

GO stand in the middle of the road in yourtown USA with a bullhorn and see what happens.

People are truly sheep.

It would have been so easy for them to have a legit assembly, we do it all the time.

The reason these clownshoes were even here was to cause trouble. I'm very sorry that 911 truth isn't as widespread as it should be, but coming to my city to cause trouble to get media attention is unprofessional and rude.



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 06:48 AM
link   
reply to post by kosmicjack
 


I live here and I can vouch that this is an inaccurate description hyped up to cause turmoil.

Did anyone watch the superbowl? The aftermath of that was much worse than the g-20 summit.



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by jprophet420
reply to post by kosmicjack
 


I live here and I can vouch that this is an inaccurate description hyped up to cause turmoil.

Did anyone watch the superbowl? The aftermath of that was much worse than the g-20 summit.


Which part of the description is inaccurate?

And those videos are fake as well?



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 10:38 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Lemon.Fresh
 


As I said the video is not indicative of anything other than what you should expect to happen when standing in the middle of the street. Last time I checked it was both illegal and hazardous. I don't think its (the one i responded to) fake, I think its some assholes trying to get media coverage and using a situation to create a larger draw.


I spoke with two city workers who were heading back to their office after lunch. What did they think of the protesters? "We haven't seen any," said one. And this is precisely the point of all the security measures--out of sight, out of sound from the Conference Center. "It's a police state downtown," said Witold Walczak, state director of the ACLU…


Its not a police state downtown, its not even close. The protesters were all over our news, if it didn't make the national news its not because it was oppressed. It was a corporate decision not to air the story, not government.

My grandfather was alive the last time Pittsburgh was in a police state and described it to me in great detail and with pictures. It looked nothing like the g-20 summit for the record. And it wasn't that bad from his description either, it was genuinely for the protection of residents from the floods.



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 11:33 AM
link   
i saw this on the news. just college kids, looked like peaceful hippies in my opinion.. and they bring out hundreds of armored men?? what the hell was that about?



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 11:41 AM
link   
In reply to a number of comments:

It's my understanding that the police do not enforce constitutional law, they enforce the laws of commerce.

It might be beneficial to have a read of this:
mary_elizabeth_croft.pdf

Understand that the police enforce corporate law as they are a branch of THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA the corporation. You are bound to that set of laws by the contracts you have been entered into by means of your birth certificate and various licences you have obtained. Also keep in mind that whenever you see your name written entirely in uppercase (check your driver’s licence) that is actually a reference to the corporate entity you being held liable for.

This is why law enforcement can act in contradiction to the constitution. This is of course a secrete, it is supposed to seem to the general population that the police are upholding constitutional law. But, possibly unknown to them, that is not their function.

[edit on 28/9/2009 by Recouper]



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 11:57 AM
link   
reply to post by calihan_12
 


They were already here for the summit, they weren't here in response to the college kids. There were people vandalizing the local businesses, and the 'men in black' in the first video came in response to them.

Its very hard to explain the topography, but that little overpass they were on is on the one of the busiest streets in town. So when you see the video of the college kids on the overpass and the cops coming, what you don't see is all the businesses with smashed windows all up and down Forbes avenue for miles.



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by jprophet420
reply to post by kosmicjack
 


Did anyone watch the superbowl? The aftermath of that was much worse than the g-20 summit.


Did the police counter with riot gear and a sonic weapon?


Originally posted by jprophet420
It would have been so easy for them to have a legit assembly, we do it all the time.


Actually, no. They were denied a permit for a peaceful protest. What is the purpose of free speech if you have to petition the government in order to protest the government? Talk about a circle jerk. No, not you, the process.



[edit on 28/9/2009 by kosmicjack]



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by kosmicjack
 


Also what about the whole recording with the "the chief of police has declared this to be an unlawful assembly" bla bla.

How so?

Was the police chief there on the scene?

How about the protesters not recognising the authority of the police chief?
He musn't be a very good police chief in my opinion. Making some fundamental errors, like somehow forgetting that people have the right to protest....oh no sorry because they need a permit!

What a joke.



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by 0neKnows
I hate to give my opinion because I KNOW 98% of you will attack me for it... but I will say it anyway....

Just because nobody is fighting, lighting things on fire, or vandalizing anything, doesn't mean it's a peaceful protest. When you block streets (traffic), and you yell on megaphones, and yell on the top of your lungs while carrying signs, you are disturbing the peace, and you are going to get broken up by the law. You are disturbing people who want to have nothing to do with the protest.


So why weren't the g20 members assaulted by government thugs dressed like stormtroopers? After all, they shut down an entire city that wanted nothing to do with the globalist convention.



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by kosmicjack

Originally posted by jprophet420
reply to post by kosmicjack
 


Did anyone watch the superbowl? The aftermath of that was much worse than the g-20 summit.


Did the police counter with riot gear and a sonic weapon?


Originally posted by jprophet420
It would have been so easy for them to have a legit assembly, we do it all the time.



Actually, no. They were denied a permit for a peaceful protest. What is the purpose of free speech if you have to petition the government in order to protest the government? Talk about a circle jerk. No, not you, the process.



[edit on 28/9/2009 by kosmicjack]


Of course they had riot gear, there were people throwing incendiaries.

As far as the circle jerk of obtaining a permit, they wouldn't need a permit to protest in any of the many public places that the tens of thousands of other protesters are doing so right now.

Point blank, they wanted publicity, and got it. If they wanted to protest peacefully they had ample chance and chose not to utilize it.

On a personal level, its beyond ignorant for out of towners to take advantage of the situation. I really hate the loose change guys and the bad name they give people genuinely looking for the truth.



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 02:55 PM
link   

How so?


It is illegal to stand in the middle of the street with a bullhorn in your town is it not?

Go use their MO to protest and see what happens wherever you live. Then try it in a respectable manner and you will be allowed.





new topics
top topics
 
93
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join