CHILLING: 'Anonymous' Releases Video In Response to the Ongoing Riots

I clicked on this video not knowing what to expect and as the masked Anonymous individual spoke I could feel myself getting pissed.

For good or bad it is always wise to hear both sides of a story IMO before making a decision especially if there are detractors from one point of view.

The video zeros in on Minnesota and their supposedly police brutality over the last two decades. Like Anon says the person killed has no voice and only the Police word of what happened is left for public opinion.

Over the years on this very ATS site and in this forum we have seen actions by police that are hard to justify. The usual, we did not see what transpired before the beat down, or a myriad of other excuses for the police beat down are always brought up; as maybe they should be because we may not be getting the full story in a 30 second beat down clip.

Anyway if you are so inclined watch the video and see what you think.

trendingpolitics.com...

a reply to: 727Sky

I hadn't seen the footage of him being led out cuffed from the restaurant before. I don't see him resisting arrest or causing any trouble. Thank you for posting.

Rainbows
Jane

a reply to: 727Sky

When the police get too scared to do their jobs ... there won't be anyone to document or investigate the people who will eventually settle all this crap. Hopefully, the people who emerge will eradicate the political class in the same fell swoop.

Soon as everyone figures out ya don't need 'rule makers' to tell you how to live your daily lives ...

[snipped]

originally posted by: 727Sky
I clicked on this video not knowing what to expect and as the masked Anonymous individual spoke I could feel myself getting pissed.

For good or bad it is always wise to hear both sides of a story IMO before making a decision especially if there are detractors from one point of view.

The video zeros in on Minnesota and their supposedly police brutality over the last two decades. Like Anon says the person killed has no voice and only the Police word of what happened is left for public opinion.

Over the years on this very ATS site and in this forum we have seen actions by police that are hard to justify. The usual, we did not see what transpired before the beat down, or a myriad of other excuses for the police beat down are always brought up; as maybe they should be because we may not be getting the full story in a 30 second beat down clip.

Anyway if you are so inclined watch the video and see what you think.

trendingpolitics.com...

Actually, all I've read/seen are videos of the incident filmed by onlookers, and speculation on the event by various news outlets and pundits. I still haven't heard an official police statement for why they felt Floyd was cuffed and put in a position of restraint like that. Also, the officer involved in Floyd's death hasn't issued any kind of statement through his attorneys.

The silence of the police and arresting officer is presumably because their position is indefensible, which the video seems to be striking evidence of.

That being said, it's not accurate to say Floyd's story isn't being told. If anything, all we've heard is the story from the perspective of Floyd, and as mentioned the officer and police department to my knowledge haven't released any official remarks (which again is strong sign of guilt and wariness of self-incrimination)

Minneapolis has a police problem. This is known. But it's bigger than their department. It goes up to their politicians.

Remember, this is the same department that shot Justine Damond.

The cop that did this to Floyd has a long history of complaints and should not have been working.

Amy Klobuchar for one has a work history or working to get cops like Chauvin back on the job. It was part of what made her career. She is, btw, being short-listed for Biden's VP.

The current politicians in Minneapolis make it a campaign issue, time after time, to clean up the police department. They get elected on that promise, and never make good on it. Effectively, they are the only ones who can really start to kick the beehive and make real changes in the department there, and they never, ever do. They have no real interest in it. It's a convenient and neverending campaign issue they can use term after term.

Let's not pretend this incident is unique to Minneapolis police or necessarily even primarily racial. And it's a shame that it's being used to press an agenda that may not be linked to it at all in the way we think beyond the skin colors of the principles in question.

a reply to: SleeperHasAwakened

The video has very little to do with Floyd other than being peacefully walked in the middle of two police officers while being handcuffed.

The OP might want to modify the title, there's nothing "chilling" about this.

originally posted by: 727Sky
a reply to: SleeperHasAwakened

The video has very little to do with Floyd other than being peacefully walked in the middle of two police officers while being handcuffed.

Fair.

That being the case, I'm wondering when Anonymous or any other organization will give voice to officers like Darren Wilson, the policeman whose life was turned upside down, career ended, family and personal safety threatened, because he stopped a criminal rampage through the Ferguson that had inflicted property damage, assault, and attempted weapons theft?

When is anyone going to give voice to Mr. Wilson's complaints, how local witnesses committed perjury to wrongfully accuse Wilson of unjustified assault, how the national media warped and skewed the story to fit the narrative, and how the DoJ tried every angle they could to charge Mr. Wilson until forensic data made it factually impossible to conclude that Officer Wilson acted in any other way than self defense?

I wonder what role Anonymous had in helping to dox Mr. Wilson and any family/associates when the nation jumped to a very wrong conclusion that ended up being very damaging to Mr. Wilson.

There is nothing that Anonymous or any like-minded organization could say, no position they could take, that would influence my thinking any differently than the video footage that has already been released, unless for some odd reason Anonymous gained access to full, un-edited film of the incident and released it in its entirety, not snippets of the event.

originally posted by: 727Sky
a reply to: SleeperHasAwakened

The video has very little to do with Floyd other than being peacefully walked in the middle of two police officers while being handcuffed.

That’s sorta the issue here. Anonymous makes a video “about Minneapolis PD” then proceeds to cite statistics and incidents across the entire state. MPD has issues but the video does a pretty poor job of actually addressing them.

a reply to: ketsuko

You're right that Minnesota/Minneapolis have problems for a long time and it goes straight to the politicians... but I'll give them credit for making an effort and some progress...

A Minnesota task force on policing recommended 28 reforms for deadly-force incidents. After George Floyd, will its report get a serious look?

But the police federation president, Lt. Bob Kroll, is a bigger problem. At least some folks in the Twin Cities think that police are deliberately allowing the violence to escalate (at the police federation's instigation) because they're angry the cop was arrested. The general feeling is that the police are telling the people, "We'll police you however we see fit, beat and kill who we want, or we won't police at all."

Minneapolis Banned Warrior-Style Police Training. Its Police Union Kept Offering It Anyway.

There’s One Big Reason Why Police Brutality Is So Common In The US. And That’s The Police Unions.

Is Minneapolis's Trump Loving Police Union Head Facilitating the Violence?

Minneapolis Police Union President Allegedly Wore a “White Power Patch” and Made Racist Remarks

Regulation and training of the police will only go so far to fix this. We as a society need to first fix the warzones we expect these people to police for minimal compensation first if we have any chance of moving forward with this.

A lack of parenting, education, respect for authority, and resources are what's creating this. The militarized police is the response. It will always be the response. The establishment doesn't know any other way to fix this than with force...

a reply to: angelchemuel

I firmly believe that these officers should be punished for what they did.
I have wondered why we see them putting him in on one side of the car and then we end with the officers kneeling on him on the opposite side of the car. While channel hopping this weekend I saw a video clip from the store's security camera. He was put in on the sidewalk side. You can see three of the officers leaning in and the car rocking before he is on the ground on the road side. What transpired in the car that made them think this was appropriate?

I'm personally offended everytime a person condones lethal force by the police-state! Enough is enough! While these nimwits are in the practice to place blame on unarmed citizens, there are many of us who are preoccupied with demanding police transparency in all matters of police street patrol duties! This "in-your-face tactics of policing is far from anything acceptable in a democratic republic and ignoring it causes further harm on our socirty. As it stands now, police unions stands in the way of compulsive body-cam usage. It may be in favor by certain jurisdictions, yet, other local and state laws are reluctant to force police officer's to use them accordingly.

But, that is only one issue amomg many. Although I'm quite equipped to give a long list of anti-American public policies that impede the rights and liberties of the individual, that would take too much time and energy in this rant. However, what is blatantly obvious is the fact that little is known to deviate our system than what we known concerning the Stassi of East-Berin. The mere fact "Dubya Bush, Lyte, said "we are a country of laws," he did so with too many sycophants that applauded on his statement! Not only are we more aware due to "Snowden's" disclosures, but now Mr. Assange is fighting for his life, freedoms, and liberties, for informing the masses of events your "Free Press" declines to address. Corruption on top of corruption is now the rule and our streets are marred with the blood of murdered citizens!

Apparently, we've allowed a cancer to thrive on we the host, and it's time to take back our birthrights to manage ourselves without the police-state and their sponsor's interference. To enshrine our beliefs and rights and never allow others to decide our rights are only "privileges" subject to change on a moment's notice! After all, that is what our elected officials sworn to support and defend when they take office. Anything less is nothing but corruption and must be viewed from that perspective. Right now, free speech is threatened like never before. Thought police roams the airwaves and speaking in any way that others might find offending is enough to punish anyone involved. Again, enough is enough! And, anyone who claims otherwise are the true enemy spawned from within!

a reply to: 727Sky

Although your point is correct, this unnecessary death of Floyd is determined by the video itself. All too often, eyewitnesses tstimony and video recording is considered "questionable" and subject to argument and in a court setting and such argument(s) can, and often deviate from the true facts involved. However, body-cams worn by police personnel at the scene often display facts that can't be deemed as "questionable." And, as the old saying implies, "a picture says a thousand words" becomes more relevant in discovering the truth in a court setting. Yet, there is an ironic aspect to this situation. Past lagal jursprudence allows police testimony to be more worthy than the public itself. And, many states have different laws concerning the use of body-cams. The various police unions are involved in the denial of public inspections from body-cams and in certain local and state jurisdictions are not used at all. In fact, they also argue for the need to confiscate footage recorded by non-law enforcement people at the scene.

In fact, many cases that need further inspection from court attorneys are often denied due to the fact the officer(s) involved shut the cams off during ther interaction with the public. Or, they claim their body-cam was inoperative at the time in question. And, their argument that video recordings "can" be "edited" later by mmbers of the pubic "may" be the a possible destruction of evidence and to be used to hinder proper police investigations. Thus, they feel the need to confiscate personal property. However, aside from the fact this is illegal, they "assume" they are immune to such arguments and base such assumptions from past court decisions. That, and the fact the Supreme Court "allows" this behavior with advanced police powers. This is easily observed with the creation of "qualified immunity." But, what does that inply? That is the main question that needs more public awareness. And, is only one aspect from many that hinders a person's defense in court. It simply allows police officers immunity if and when they make mistakes during the detainment of public members if and when their mistakes aid in the process of detecting criminal activity by those he detains. In other words, they have additional protections from government officials that is quite contrary to you and your liberties.

And, this is part of enhancing police powers. There is another term that supports such assumptions and again, is worthy of public knowledge. And that is, "the police "work under the color of authority." They do, and you don't. Again, they are immune to their behavior that would be used against you n court if and when you arrested for a crime that mirrors the same behavior of police personnel. For example, a police officer can enter your fenced property when looking for a family relative with "wants and warrants." He may suspect that person is there but not sure. Therefore, he has no warrant to enter your home and he claims he's only there to gain information. However, by entering your yard by opening the gate he is confronted with your barking dog. He decides to shoot your dog for his "report" says later the dog posed a threat to him personally. Whether this may be a true fact or not, he shot your dog dead. This has happened more than people know. And, once he leaves and you decide to make an official complaint and to seek compensation in court, you are denied. His behavior is covered with qualified immunity.

Now, let's make a similar situation that involves your behavior. For the sake of argument, let's assume this hypothetical situation is true. You have an older dog dying from cancer. You could have it put-down by a vet but that will cost you a hundred dollars. So, you take him out in the back yard and shoot him in the head to put him out of his misery. A nosey neighbor witnessed the fact and calls the police. Next, you are arrested for "cruelty of an animal and the illegal discharge of a firearm within city limits. The prosecutor charges you with a felony concerning the dog and you are looking at seven to fourteen years in the state's lockup. You go to court, and hopefully you have a good attorney, only to see not only the prosecutor, but a member of "ASPCA" sitting next to him. This happened here locally. In fact, my sister-in-law sat on the jury. They refused to convict the guy for the felony, but found him quilty of a misdemeanor. He was released for time served, paid a fine, and was on probation for two years. That is the difference. The police officer is "working under the color of authority" and relies of "qualified immunity." And, you don't or can't.

Now although many will assume that is too trivial when discussing police powers, make no mistake, this is the core of government intrusions. You, and your stature as a human being, i micro-managed with draconian laws that render you unworthy of self-determination. You are treated like livestock to be managed with massive government control. Everyday another law is enacted for further control and rarely meet the standards of the constitution and bill of rights. The government suiggests this is required with scare tactics and the propaganda that entices public acceptance based on fear. You, as a citizen, have little to say on matters you find worthy and the nanny-police state is here to "rescue" you from the pitfalls of living. No thank you. I prefer to exist without such determinations and I simply refuse governmental doctrine that claims otherwise. I know my rights and I won't argue with a police officer who is ignorant of this fact, or refusing to comply with my rights. And, what I see recently, other people are also disgusted with the same reality that we all face today and are confronting the system entirely.

And, regardless of the opinions of angry supporters of this illegal and strict system of government oppression and intrusions, I say save it. I refuse your reasoning and your scare tactics are worthless. Too many unarmed citizens have been killed as a result of your reasoning. The police claim they only want to go home to their families whole and intact, and I agree with that that, but they "must" realize everyone wants the same! They are trained and funded properly to do their duties and they have other tools to rely on beside their firearm. Police unions must comply or find another career. A radical inspection must be done and true transparency ust be ilable to anyone in our society. Period! Despite their claims otherwise, they work for us. We pay their salaries. And, they are subject to societal norms and standards. And, those standards are based on the constitution and nothing more. Due to the fact our rights and liberties are threatened to this degree, all police operations must be viewed for reforming directives. And, if they "feel" that is expecting too much, they are invited to work in another career. a reply to: SleeperHasAwakened

My first thought after watching this video is this, was the Asian officer a rookie? I seem to recall seeing reports he was only on the force for a few weeks. If so how does he have a history of shootings? I am calling out anonymous for their "investigation" techniques. If they want to criticize the lack of transparency that is fine, but do not criticize and use similar tactics while doing so. I actually don't think this came from anonymous as we know it. One of the failings of their methods is the very fact anyone can make that claim and who is to naysay it?

originally posted by: 727Sky
I clicked on this video not knowing what to expect and as the masked Anonymous individual spoke I could feel myself getting pissed.

For good or bad it is always wise to hear both sides of a story IMO before making a decision especially if there are detractors from one point of view.

The video zeros in on Minnesota and their supposedly police brutality over the last two decades. Like Anon says the person killed has no voice and only the Police word of what happened is left for public opinion.

Over the years on this very ATS site and in this forum we have seen actions by police that are hard to justify. The usual, we did not see what transpired before the beat down, or a myriad of other excuses for the police beat down are always brought up; as maybe they should be because we may not be getting the full story in a 30 second beat down clip.

Anyway if you are so inclined watch the video and see what you think.

trendingpolitics.com...

If there was no vid at all, it all gets swept under the rug, nevermind the 30 seconds before.