Occupy D.C. Protesters Lash Out at Police

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by Trader666, Feb 6, 2012.

  1. Check out these subhuman occuturds, courtesy of our entitlement culture. Too bad the police are so restrained.

    <iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Ul3OFY6KApk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
  2. Oh gee, guess what? doesn't show what happened just before that. This is a great example of the attempts of the plutocrat owned media to portray the OWS protesters badly. What it doesn't show is the police hitting someone just before the video starts. Isn't that interesting? And you want to complain about the selective "liberal media" ? This is a blatant example of taking things out of context and of the stupid righty ideologues buying it hook, line and sinker.

    So what, they said nasty stuff to the cops after just having been pushed by them. Try backing-up and pushing/hitting anyone and see how they respond.

    Do you know how scared the plutocrats that run this country are of the OWS movement and the message it brings? Do you think the big rich boys behind CNN, FOX want to publicize their message? They'd be shooting themselves in the foot. And you guys let yourselves get brainwashed by them, that exercising an essential American right to protest inequity and the growing power of the few, is a bad thing. Amazing.
  3. Please post the unedited video showing "what happened just before that."
  4. Ricter


    Dissent would not get a nasty response from Authority if it would simply follow the rules Authority has created.
  5. Please, this is not "dissent". It is a bunch of spoiled pricks having a public temper tantrum. They seized a public park and denied other people, ie the taxpayers who support the park, use of it. That is why there are even-handed rules governing the use of public property. Just because you have some grievance doesn't give you the right to take over public property.

    In obama's america, there are two sets of rules. One for his cronies and supporters, another for everybody else.
  6. Yes. Imagine them having the nerve to exercise their first amendment rights and using a PUBLIC PLACE to do it! The anal-retentive righties get all upset when things get messy. They like everything neat and orderly and with military discipline.

    The righties seem to remember the part about religion but not about the second part.

    "The (first) amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion,

    abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances."

    I would go so far as to say to that most of those criticizing OWS are un-American and would be more comfortable in a police state.
  7. Lucrum


    Even when it infringes on the rights of others?
  8. Committing violence and vandalism is not free speech. Unprovoked attacks against police officers when asked to disperse is not free speech.
  9. OK, here I go again. Middle of road, sort of. I remember the LA riots, I remember Rodney King, I remember Kent State, and too much more to list. I love and respect the police, the National Guard, and others who have risked their lives many times, working with protesters and their ilk.

    When Maher said something like 'get jobs douchebags' or whatever, he had a good point. Many of the law abiding types had gone home, leaving the, for lack of a better term, the lower echelon.

    We must keep room for this type of demonstration. We must allow for Tea-party types, yes they tend to be pretty peaceful, to gather as well. And I don't ever want to see the horrific brutality that we've seen in the past, when un-provoked. Is un-provoked a real term, don't want to get yelled at by either side's grammar police.

    I, too, would like to see the whole video.

    I have to go along with the cops on this, when all is said and done. We need to keep the peace for the rest of us. We need more leaders of such movements to embrace the 'non-violent' part of 'non-violence' - I hope this makes some sense to everyone.

  10. I'm upset about two things.

    One, the Park Service is applying its own rules in a biased manner. They will not let other groups camp overnight on federal land in the District of Columbia. There are explicit rules against it. These people were allowed to do so however. The courts have already ruled on it in the context of demonstrators in Lafayette Square, across the street from the White House. Groups do not have the right to camp out as part of their demonstration.

    Two, the park is public property, meant to be open at all times to all citizens. One group has basically seized it for their private purposes and the government assisted them in holding it for their own use. This is not dissent. It is mob rule, aided and abetted by the government.

    The government does the same thing when the anti-globalization thugs show up. They allow them to block entrances to office buildings, tie up streets, etc. People that are trying to get to work are out of luck, and the police actually protect the goons from law-abiding citizens.

    It is clearly political. Obama saw the Occupy morons as useful proxies to be on the news echoing the same class hatred demagoguery he has sunk to. So they got a free pass. If the Tea Party groups, which were clean, lawabiding and respectful, had tried something like this, the storm troopers would have given them a beat down. Everyone knows it.
    #10     Feb 6, 2012