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.

 

Analysis of the Timeline of Scott Olsen Video, you won't believe this,

page: 2
11
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 28 2011 @ 05:02 AM
link   
reply to post by ColCurious
 


Thanks for this info as well, I'll look into it some more. But as far as I know, it's all in the name of 'national security'. Go figure?



posted on Oct, 28 2011 @ 10:26 AM
link   
reply to post by morder1
 


Thanks for the vid morder1, It is very interesting that when the first tear gas was thrown a citizen threw it back into the cops. I think I know what was thrown first, what appeared to be a rag seems like it was Scotts hat (correct me if i am wrong), the camouflage hat that he wore at the beginning of that vid.

Now the question is, how did the cops get hold of it in the first place? What was Scott hit with point blank? it is also very clear that the cop who threw that canister when people were trying to help Scott communicated something using the mic on his shoulder before Scotts hat was thrown...
edit on 28-10-2011 by LiveEquation because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-10-2011 by LiveEquation because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 28 2011 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Logarock
 


What does that say about our society when the only thing that will get noticed involves a veteran?



posted on Oct, 28 2011 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Evolutionsend
reply to post by Logarock
 


What does that say about our society when the only thing that will get noticed involves a veteran?


It says everything THEY wan't it to. Divide the classes, then conquer the masses. Every tool has been used to create senseless arguments against eachother. So long as we're stuck in our drama ( which is almost always stupid, just people being arrogant) We will take our eyes off the bigger problems.



posted on Oct, 28 2011 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by SJE98
 


Geeeeezzz!!! That bruise from those rubber bullets looks crazy!!


Those things must pack a real wollop!! I wear eye protection when playing paintbal and paint balls dont even leave bruises like that!. Im sure your eyeball would explode if you were hit in the eye with one of those rubber ones.



posted on Oct, 28 2011 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by JBRiddle
 



OK, but where is it written that you have to aim at as person's head? If the goal is dispersal, then aim it at the pavement. There certainly ought to be an investigation, but not one in which the cops investigate themselves, imo.



posted on Oct, 28 2011 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by LiveEquation
reply to post by morder1
 


Thanks for the vid morder1, It is very interesting that when the first tear gas was thrown a citizen threw it back into the cops. I think I know what was thrown first, what appeared to be a rag seems like it was Scotts hat (correct me if i am wrong), the camouflage hat that he wore at the beginning of that vid.

Now the question is, how did the cops get hold of it in the first place? What was Scott hit with point blank? it is also very clear that the cop who threw that canister when people were trying to help Scott communicated something using the mic on his shoulder before Scotts hat was thrown...


So you're saying you think that one of the protestors threw a tear gas canister back at the cops and hit Scott in the head with it accidentally, and the impact flung his hat over the barrier in with the cops? And then one of the cops threw it back afterwards?



posted on Oct, 28 2011 @ 02:10 PM
link   
reply to post by JBRiddle
 


None of that matters though. You may have been indoctrinated to believe that "democratically elected" mayors and city council people may create rules and legislation which supersede the constitution and / or bill of rights, but you are wrong. The only process which can do so is the amendment process and it requires ratification by 2/3 of the states in the US. So far -- none have altered or superseded the 1st.



posted on Oct, 28 2011 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by SavedOne
 


NO i am saying that. At the begining of the vid, a protestor throws a live canister back to the cops...at that point Scott is still standing and ok, he was infact looking at the cops while his friend had a flag next to him. The clip that shows Scott being hit by a rubber bullet is not there (He could not have been hit by a canister since there would have been smoke where he was lying, but there wasn't- so he was shot point blank with a rubber bullet)


edit on 28-10-2011 by LiveEquation because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 28 2011 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by purplemer
What is happening to democracy your right to demonstrate in America.. This sucks



You mean the right of the people to assemble?

Like the rest of them if you dont force it they take it away.



posted on Oct, 28 2011 @ 03:15 PM
link   
So what does the ATF have to say about using a 40mm destructive device as a lethal weapon? It doesnt make one bit of difference if its registered under the NFA to a police dept. That person firing it has taken classes been on the range and gotten a certification. The damn well know firing a canister at less then 40 yards is potentially lethal with a short range round. They also know you dont bounce a canister ever. You move backwards to the length the round will go and have it drop in the correct place on the ground.

Thats a 20 year federal felony. Will he be charged? Since he has committed the crime and everyone knows.....

We get to see exactly how dirty the ATF is.



posted on Oct, 28 2011 @ 06:30 PM
link   
I am at a loss for words after watching that.

Well at least for ones that I should post on here



posted on Oct, 28 2011 @ 06:32 PM
link   
I don't understand how the mayor can tell people to not protest, to go back to their homes. It is within their rights to protest isn't it? You can't tell a group of people they can't exercise their rights.
reply to post by JBRiddle
 



posted on Oct, 28 2011 @ 06:33 PM
link   
The 2nd grenade thrown into the people responding to an inured person is friggin' disgusting! I understand the application of crowd dispersal and control, but that little coward move was out of line. I bet the guy chuckled to himself when he did that.
I am wondering about grenade launch procedures. What was used there, flash bomb, tear gas, rubber bullet grenade? Are they supposed to be aimed at the ground, air or directly at the people. Were these police using a grenade 'launcher?" I see the ones lobbed, but I am wondering about the one that hit Scott. The velocity was from it was more than a hand toss. Did someone aim at head level and shoot a grenade, or could it have been a shrapnel effect? Whatever it was, it knocked him down and out immediately, with force.

spec



posted on Oct, 28 2011 @ 06:38 PM
link   
reply to post by LiveEquation
 


Is that chick with the yellow sleeves at 0:19 smiling from ear to ear even though them nasty blasts just went off?



posted on Oct, 28 2011 @ 07:10 PM
link   
This footage and others I have seen is just disgusting. It it so obvious that the grenade was thrown at them. Why don't any of his fellow workmates rat him out? I just cannot believe that all the cops just stood there doing nothing! Who the hell lets these people become cops to begin with? The cops in Adelaide would not just stand there or even throw a grenade (well I hope if the time came they wouldn't but who knows?) I would not feel safe living in that city after witnessing that.

To the city of Oakland... DO NOT let them win and go for it! The world is watching



posted on Oct, 29 2011 @ 04:05 AM
link   
Compare the events shown on the videos with the Oakland PD's own "crowd control" policies:

www.nlgsf.org...

Example - Their policy on the use of "sound and light diversionary/distraction devices" known to everyone else as Flashbangs...




N. Sound, Light and Chemical Diversionary Devices
1. Sound, Light and Chemical Diversionary Devices shall not be used for crowd control or crowd dispersal without the approval of a supervisor or command officer.
2. The use of sound and light diversionary/distraction devices presents a risk of permanent loss of hearing or serious bodily injury from shrapnel. Said devices shall be deployed to explode at a safe distance from the crowd to minimize the risk of personal injury and while moving the crowd in the direction that will accomplish the policing objective
3. Sound and light distraction/diversion devices shall not be used for crowd control without first giving audible warnings to the crowd and additional reasonable time to disperse.
4. Sound and light diversionary/distraction devices shall only be used if other techniques, such as encirclement and mass arrest or police formations, have failed or will not accomplish the policing goal as determined by the Incident Commander.


As you can see from the above - OPD fails at following its own procedures. For the record, I believe that Scott Olsen was hit in the face by a striker from an exploding flashbang.



posted on Oct, 29 2011 @ 04:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by JBRiddle
reply to post by LiveEquation
 


Look I understand the outrage that most of you fell seeing a war veteran getting injured. But let us not forget they (the protesters) were Ordered my the Mayor of Oakland (a democratically elected official) and the Oakland Police department to disperse and return to there homes. The Protesters were asked several time to leave and given several warning to vacate the area, they refused. Everyone knew damn well what would happen if they did not comply. They KNEW the police would use tear gas and rubber bullets to disperse the crowd, and yet the STAYED of there own accord.

Yes I am sorry that people were injured (a war veteran among them) but they place themselves in harms way and if they were not prepared for the consequences, well its there own damn fault.

"If you poke a dog with a stick long enough don't be surprised when it bits you!"
-Anonymous-




It's their legal right to assemble peacefully, which is exactly what happened until cops showed up in riot gear and launched a surprised military attack.

How the hell did they KNOW the cops were going to use tear gas and rubber bullets? Maybe they should have known the OPD was capable of it, having gone far over the line before with protesters(2003). So if a crowd which is peacefully assembling is asked to leave by the cops, and they don't comply, you feel shooting and gassing women and children, among others is a reasonable response?


When harm(violence) is perpetrated, you blame the victim for being in harms way.

If a sister or family was raped, would you blame them for being in harms way?

No! You blame the despicable human being who showed little respect for anothers life in such a brazen way.
edit on 29-10-2011 by MysticPearl because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-10-2011 by MysticPearl because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-10-2011 by MysticPearl because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1   >>

log in

join