And these don't count.
The first video is Pittsburgh Police (ok, to Posse Comitatus issue here) breaking up an "unlawful" (um -- hey guys -- First Amendment, remember?) demonstration using the now standard in political strong arm L.E. thuggery The Long Range Acoustic Device. (I'm assuming this is at the G-20 but I don't know that for sure).
The second video IS at the G-20 wherein we see some camoflaged uniformed persons shoving a protestor into a car and speeding away. Is this Army or National Guard personel? On American soil? Being used for Law Enforcement?
Just what the devil is going on here, Mr, President? Are you using Federal tropps to break up simple demonstrations? And why?
And if it is more than that then what is it?
I think what a protestor shouts at the end of the second video says it all, Mr. President.
What the fuck is wrong with you?
both vids h/t Christian Soldier:
Update --
This photo is from the Hotair link In Mary's Image left in the comments.This is no hoax (even Hotair says that now) but I don't think they're plain cops either.Contrary to the comments over there these guys in camo ARE most definitely armed.
Look at the close up picture on the bottom. There is a telltale bulge on the guy's left hip. That's a handgun printing through his concealment (those who carry learn to look for these things, and try to avoid it on themselves).
Additionally, in the video, as they stuff the kid into the car, both of the camo guys raise their arms enough that their guns/holsters flash from under their uniforms.
This is no performance video. If it were they wouldn't take the time to conceal the weapons.
And why would cops be wearing clip on I.D. tags on their left arms?
Something stinks here. To high heaven.
Who are these guys?
UPDATE 2 Ok, so who's this guy on the ground? And why? And the camo kneeling on or aside of him is certainly wearing more obvious hardware than this other camoflaged brethern.
It's not the same guy being shoved in the car, he was wearing a blue backpack. Unless this picture is taken afterwards.
16 comments:
I figured they were guard, but how can you tell?
Maybe this will help?
"Update IV: Stephen Gutowski gets confirmation from the G-20 Joint Information Center that the men clad in camouflage fatigues are police officers, and that the man was arrested for vandalism."
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/09/25/video-the-purported-military-arrest-at-the-g-20-protest/
WTF? There are other photos up on CNN, FOX etc. some showing Iraq or possibly Afghanistan camo besides this older type. What the hell are police on duty doing in military camo?
Obama is there pushing for establishment of a "stronger, more balanced global economy" and focus on "climate change, financial regulatory reform, and global imbalances". Meanwhile there are cops in camo with audio weapons out arresting Ayerspawn college student nitwits protesting against capitalism? What does it say when you make a show of force and superior technology in putting down a protest of people who are on your own side?
Because you can...?
This is starting to sound more and more like the "Project X" sound weapon in "Atlas Shrugged" except that so far it doesn't blow up goats or bridges...
See the update I just put up. There is no way these goons are regular cops. They are gov't thugs of some stripe, whether military (I don't think so) paramilitary, Treasury/Secret Service or contract security. Just by their posture and the way they move.
And if Hotair is buying that they are arresting that dude, shoving him in the car and speeding off like that for vandalism, then I have to think they have taken a hit on Charles Johnson's pipe.
well look at the upside. they had great haircuts and I can only wish I could tool around in a slick sedan like that.
plus the look on the anarchist dumbass they stuffed was priceless kinda like a mastercard commercial.
landscape brick from homedepot, 2.75, broken starbucks window 490 dollars, seeing the look on a stupid anarchist bums face as he's stuffed in a government sedan,...
priceless
There is something very strange about this.
Were there reports that these guys were milling around the event the whole time? Or, did they go after that guy specifically? What did he do wrong? Why wasn't he handcuffed? How did they control him in the car if he was not handcuffed? Where did they take him?
If you listen closely, the kid (I believe) yells to his friend as they force him into the car, "You guys, I'm dead."
Does anyone know where this kid is now?
How did they radio for the car to come? Did they have radio?
I would have believed this to have been a staged hoax, a la Allahpundit, but if there is confirmation, then something is very wrong.
This was not done according to normal protocol if it were a police arrest.
This guy may have been under specific surveillance?
Why the fatigues?
There's no good reason for them.
Yeah, I'm thinking the guy may have been up to something a little more sinister than vandalism. Either that or we have complete over-reaction.
Again, this link from Mary is the confirmation it was an arrest. But for vandalism.
Kinda like what you and I talked about today, Pastorius.
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/09/25/video-the-purported-military-arrest-at-the-g-20-protest/
I thought also it could have been staged. but follow the logical conclusion,
they say he was arrested, that means an arrest report,
that means arresting officers on the report.
that means an arestee who cannot be made to disapear.
thier has to be a chain of custody.
dont blow this up to big.
this could still be a case of a dumbass stuffed in a car with a priceless look on his face.
Maybe, rumcrook. It just seems a bit excessive. Added another update.
I think they're ex military...fed up with trustafarian-punks...decided to teach this guy a lesson. It is Pennsylvania-not California! I bet he'll never protest again.
FauxBoMustGo!
MR,
I think Anonymous' theory is plausible.
The Statement from the G-20 Joint Information Center is actually EXTREMELY ambiguous.
Here what it says:
"""The individuals involved in the 9/24/2009 arrest which has appeared online are law enforcement officers from a multi-agency tactical response team assigned to the security operations for the G20.
It is not unusual for tactical team members to wear camouflaged fatigues. The type of fatigues the officers wear designates their unit affiliation. Prior to the arrest, the officers observed this subject vandalizing a local business. Due to the hostile nature of the crowd, officer safety and the safety of the person under arrest, the subject was immediately removed from the area."""
http://thecollegepolitico.com/the-truth-about-the-military-kidnapping-video-from-the-g-20/
Think about it, MR, what the hell does this mean:
"...law enforcement officers from a multi-agency tactical response team ..."
There's something VERY FISHY ABOUT THIS.
I mean, seriously, have you ever heard of such a thing before, or have you ever seen police wearing camos?
More here than meets the eye. It could be some legitimate response from the government, but I don't think Hot Air is right that the question has been answered. I can't even begin to understand how they think THAT is an answer.
I just read another story where a U.S. flag burner was tied to a pole with duct tape ( by vets) and left there for six hours! People are tired of these piss-ant 'tough guys' dissing our country and military. I bet you see more of this underground, takin' care of bizzness type of activity.
Just sayin'
FauBoMustGo!
Pastorius -- you and I are kinda saying the same thing I think. I say paramilitary or contract help. I can believe gov't types, but not L.E. L.E. wouldn't conceal handguns under camo. They'd carry them open where they are much quicker to get at. And they can't sell the bullshit that the guns were concealed for crowd safety when, in the same picture, you have riot police carrying openly.
They may be there legitimately on gov't business but they are not L.E. They're either paramilitary or private (gov't contracted -- think something like Blackwater) security.
As far as Anon's theory I can see that, ex-military in a private contracted role going a little beyond the norm.
But yeah, the official story is bullshit.
HEY! Maybe they're SEIU!
Yes, I've been mulling this over all night. I can not figure out any way in which the official story makes sense.
It is bullshit.
maybe the simplest explanation, if your going to be doing quik strikes at the protestors and your going to be getting rough and tumble you want cloths that are loose fitting and flexible and iron tough.
bdu's fit the bill.
if you have a list of fast objectives to carry out like snatching potential worst offenders getting ready to do something really ignorant, or your on the look out for numbnuts with existing warrants you want to look identifiable to your comrades but not stand out so much you look like helmeted padded riot police.
also you want to make statements that will get around the protest that if you do something really stupid your being watched and at a later date you will get snatched at the first convenient moment like a wilderbeast getting to far from the edge of the herd.
but the fact that they didnt take away his back pack at a minimum is odd to me as well as not zip tying his wrists.
Post a Comment