Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
When they said, "I just don't understand why you can't answer a simple question", she should simply have replied, "You won't tell me who called you, i won't answer your question either. Quid pro quo, respect comes mutually."

Simple, polite, and truthful.

Yes, respect comes mutually. From the moment she answered her door she showed no respect. She was rude and condensending to them.

Tell her who called them???? Since when do police ever tell who called in an anomymous tip? Think about it for a moment. If I call the police on my neighbor whose dog is barking all night.. do I want them telling that person who called? Come on.. be reasonable.

Originally posted by Alienmojo

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
When they said, "I just don't understand why you can't answer a simple question", she should simply have replied, "You won't tell me who called you, i won't answer your question either. Quid pro quo, respect comes mutually."

Simple, polite, and truthful.

Yes, respect comes mutually. From the moment she answered her door she showed no respect. She was rude and condensending to them.

Tell her who called them???? Since when do police ever tell who called in an anomymous tip? Think about it for a moment. If I call the police on my neighbor whose dog is barking all night.. do I want them telling that person who called? Come on.. be reasonable.

I don't know the whole story here (or even if this is a real incident).

I am law abiding. I don't attend protests, as local protests accomplish nothing in a town of 30k. If police show up at my door questioning my actions, i will be hostile in my responses as i view it as official invasion into my privacy.

However, if they are seeking information about harm to someone, i guarnatee i am not a part of that and will be all too happy to tell what i know to protect property/people. That is American.

Edit to add: The FBI's job is to enforce law, not to prevent violations. Although it is not a bad idea, if that is their job then they have some splainin' to do when it comes to Van Der Sloot.



[edit on 13-6-2010 by bigfatfurrytexan]

Do I think that the FBI coming to this ladies door....stating he didn't know what protest she had gone to...and that he just wanted to know if she KNEW...etc..etc..blahblahblah...is wrong..? yup...on a couple different levels.

It was great that she got a video camera...but...she could have stated...NO...I do NOT know of anyone that's going to be hurt or of property that's going to be destroyed.!! NOW...can I help you with anything more....? no? alrighty then!!!

In my opinion...she could have gotten rid of them faster and made more of a point by making it all so simple then dragging it out like she did!! In my OPINION...(in case your watching riley..haha) She wanted to show us how clever she could be...it's not about that...it's about the FBI keeping flippin tabs on us and harassing us at home because they SEEN US AT A PROTEST!!! (sigh)

Originally posted by jfj123

A picture of a document has text in it. Text is easily identifiable via recognition software. Photo of say a tree cannot be disassembled the same way.

Facial recognition software is not really that new and what google and others are using it for to refine IMAGE SEARCHES is amazing. I used to read all about it in Wired magazine before I stopped getting it over a year ago. Just saying. Videos are just a bunch of pictures in a row.

Originally posted by AceWombat04
I can only repeat what I said in my first post. I feel that the people or officers who questioned the woman did so with courtesy, respect, and mild manners. I don't like the fact that someone can be questioned in such a way as a direct consequence of peaceful assembly, but I do not feel that they (at least that I could see in this video) violated her rights or privacy in any way.

Yes, they were well restrained, and within parameters. Tried to carry on a civil conversation, and we see what they got. No wonder so many turn into A-holes after a short time on the job, having to deal with foolishness like that.

Camera Lady, by reacting so negatively to such simple questions, probably get herself put fairly high on some investigator's 'to do' list if they were real. That just made her look suspicious as hell.

And that, my friend, is why the nice guys go out first, or in the more entertaining cases, the investigator acts nice at first. When they smell blood, they turn into sharks.

If you don't bleed on 'em, they keep looking for other prey.

Also, they stated time and again that it wasn't because of her mere presence at a protest. Either they thought she heard or saw something, or someone else heard or saw something concerning her. Her reactions to such simple questions made her look suspicious as they get. All that from a feeler interview. I wonder what happens if a REAL interview goes down?

It's not like they have the manpower to chase down every single person at a protest. There is SOME reason this woman was singled out as potentially of interest. This video, if genuine, only gives HER side of the story, and in that case, not only is she hiding something from the FBI, she's hiding something from the rest of us as well.


[edit on 2010/6/13 by nenothtu]

Originally posted by Hedera Helix
They're driving a car that was registered to a 60+ y/o woman in June 2009. And I keep getting visions of Mulder and Scully in my head working outside their authority of the FBI and US Marshall's office. Why is that???

\

Are you asking me how your imagination works? I am really not sure what you are saying to me here.

This woman definetly handled herself very well in that situation, well done
thats dodgy as hell to think ppl can show a badge and have the authority to do that to a mother of 5. Im so glad i dont live in america , from the video you could tell that by them asking her over and over again they where trying to get her to differentiate on her story thus implying guilt and break the law

If this gentlemen and lady came to my door, and conducted themselves in this manner, I would provide them with a beverage and dessert if they would receive it. I would emphasize that the point of the protesting is to protest the violence of one group against the other and, therefore, would very much lend to peaceful personal conduct. I might still video the exchange as it is important to know that the government is conducting such operations, but to be scared of polite questioning is quite uncivil. What we need to be concerned about is when the government stops questioning people as a good neighbor and simply breaks down the door. Nevertheless, the fearful sheep see fear in everything that passes their gaze and the government would do well to be even more communicative/responsible/accountable on a federal level, respectfully involved with community in more areas on a very local government level, and less existing on the levels between.

[edit on 6/13/2010 by Dasher]

Outstanding video - thank you!

I am impressed by your calm demeanor. I personally would have been quite enraged by this visit and probably acted stupidly.

Sounds like you may have a snitch (or a spy) in your circle. Maybe a good idea to try to smoke 'em out - carefully.

Keep it up - cockroaches scurry in the bright light!

Originally posted by K J Gunderson

Originally posted by Hedera Helix
They're driving a car that was registered to a 60+ y/o woman in June 2009. And I keep getting visions of Mulder and Scully in my head working outside their authority of the FBI and US Marshall's office. Why is that???

Are you asking me how your imagination works? I am really not sure what you are saying to me here.

Not really saying much of anything at this point. Just muttering to myself and trying on ideas to see how they fit... and using Mulder and Scully as my reference.

Originally posted by Hedera Helix

Originally posted by K J Gunderson

Originally posted by Hedera Helix
They're driving a car that was registered to a 60+ y/o woman in June 2009. And I keep getting visions of Mulder and Scully in my head working outside their authority of the FBI and US Marshall's office. Why is that???

Are you asking me how your imagination works? I am really not sure what you are saying to me here.

Not really saying much of anything at this point. Just muttering to myself and trying on ideas to see how they fit... and using Mulder and Scully as my reference.

Huh???

You seem to have addressed a question directly to me and I do not see anything about Mulder and Scully in it. I am very confused.

This moronic woman is putting her children's future in jeopardy just to prove a point? Seriously talking back or acting smart to law enforcement is ALWAYS a horrible idea, especially a federal department with the sort of power that the FBI have. Disgusting, but I really do admire her courage, like really.

[edit on 13-6-2010 by SteveZ]

[edit on 13-6-2010 by SteveZ]

Originally posted by SmokeytheHair
Is it just me, or did she seem like her goal was to upset them?
She constantly repeated their questions and kept reiterating the fact that she's a mom.... because it's totally unheard of for a mom to do illegal things/kill people.
Seriously, the guy gets a from me for not getting severely annoyed at her for acting like a 12 year old trying to prove her parents wrong by providing only one, loosely based reason for why she is right and sounding like a broken record repeating everything he says five times. Then, to top it off, she tries to create an unnecessary heated political debate when all she had to do was answer, or refuse to answer ONE question.
She was just trying to "get a rise" out of him, from the very beginning until the very end, she seemed to try to antagonize them into saying or doing something, anything youtube worthy. Regardless of why they're there, cooperate, don't be a douche because you're bored, it only takes a moment to answer a damn question, or even to just plead the "first" as she EVENTUALLY did.
I don't like people like that....

[edit on 6/12/2010 by SmokeytheHair]

I agree. She sure did seem like she was doing her best to get some type of reaction from them. I personally found her to be a bit of a moron, although I agree with her that it is amazing that by participating in a peaceful protest it would warrant a visit from the FBI asking if you are planning or know of anyone planning to commit violent acts. I would also question how they make that leap from peaceful protester to possible terrorist. Are they questioning everyone? Is it just the protest she was involved in? How do they select which protesters to question, and why question about violent acts if there is nothing to indicate violence to begin with? Are they also questioning the protesters who protest the original protesters?

If anything I feel that she made herself appear suspicious. By repeating the questions she was asked over and over and over again, it looked to me like she was buying time to come up with an answer. Then when she came up with the answer to invoke her right to silence, it appeared even more suspicious. I also found it amusing that she wanted to exercise her right to be silent, but then wouldn't shut up about something she wanted to discuss. I mean really... be silent completely, or talk, but don't cherry pick what you want be silent about.

Now don't get wrong, she was well within her rights to refuse to answer anything at all, however that is one question I would advise anyone to answer right away. Simply "No". Then feel free to run your mouth about your rights or the fact that they had no right to ask you anything based on simply being a participant of a Constitutionally protected, peaceful protest. The fact that she was questioned and the FBI appeared at her door IS an outrage, but she made herself look like a douche not a victim. Her actions did nothing to help those who want real change.