The video contained on the linked-page is disgusting. A prime-example of failed crowd-control by one over-vigilant and over-reactionary riot
policemen directed against a civilian which was a non-existent threat.
Here's the logic:
You have a line of well-outfitted and armed riot control police moving slowly while making an audible cadence to "move," which was working on the
single person (he was backing-up and not a threat.)
If only that one officer could have remained "cool-under-pressure," and not over-reacted, like a common terrorist.
Please bear-with-me by trying to understand how an unarmed civilian war veteran in shorts and tennis shoes complying with the "crowd-control" tactic
presents a threat?
It would be apparent to most, that the "threat" here was indeed the over-zealous riot policeman whom over-reacted.
This is disgusting and it's certainly not what the general public pays for out of their tax dollars. There is a right way to do it and plainly the
civilian wasn't a threat, as he was stepping-back and thus, complying with the intimidation techniques which were used. He didn't deserve to be
beaten for any apparent reason.
Epic Fail on the part of the police and let me ask you over-vigilant riot policemen and women out there, "what is it going to take to make you
realize you cannot use terrorist tactics on the general public before real death and violence is unleashed?"
With a single civilian, who is away from any large crowd or gathering, is not a threat, and this violates every single constitutional right an
individual has, to just "be" no matter how close in-proximity they are to any line of riot police.
HE wasn't a clear or present danger and those commanders of the riot squad might need to be relieved of their post if they intend on ordering their
squads to do what they did in the video.
A prime-example of over-vigilant indoctrination by propaganda of police officers. And if this is left to fester and not checked, it will become a
"police state," complete with "storm-troopers," who never question orders and mindlessly run us all off a cliff.
Very sad and sickening at what propaganda and half-truths can bring into being and existence.
The "logic" which will be used to rebut this argument would be where the civilian could possibly be a "terrorist" with a bomb strapped to their body,
but let me pose this fact that terrorists do not stand in-front of riot police and try to reason or protest to them, they simply explode. Plainly,
this person did not have any kind of bomb strapped to himself due to what he was wearing.
edit on 18-11-2011 by trekwebmaster because: (no reason given)