PDA

View Full Version : Iraq Vet Marine Critically Injured by Police at Occupy Oakland



Wei Wu Wei
10-26-2011, 08:41 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZLyUK0t0vQ

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=8366081

http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=news/national_world&id=8407169

http://www.businessinsider.com/this-veteran-could-be-the-first-person-to-die-at-a-wall-street-protest-2011-10

Scott Olsen, a former Marine and veteran of Iraq was injured during an Occupy Oakland protest. Witnesses say he was struck in the head by a "police projectile".

Other protesters rushed to assist Olsen when they saw him laying motionless and bleeding on the ground, but as they gathered around him, the police threw a flash grenade into the group, scattering them.

He has suffered a fractured skull and his brain is swelling, and is in critical condition.


Scott Olsen survived two tours of Iraq, but his life could be over after being critically injured by a police projectile at Occupy Oakland, The Guardian reports. He's 24 years old.



According to Keith Shannon, a friend who served with Olsen during his time in Iraq, Olsen was hit in the head with a tear gas or smoke canister, and he has the scar on his head to prove it.

Meanwhile, Oakland police admit that they used tear gas and baton rounds, but have denied the use of flash bang grenades. Protesters, however, say they saw police use them, and the more video that comes out, the harder it is to believe the police.




"I'm just absolutely devastated that someone who did two tours of Iraq and came home safely is now lying in a US hospital because of the domestic police force," Carpenter said.


Guy said also it wasn't immediately clear whether Olsen, a network administrator in Daly City, would need surgery.

"It's still too early to tell," Guy said. "We're hoping for the best."

Curt Olsen, a spokesman for Highland Hospital in Oakland, confirmed that the veteran was in critical condition but could not release any more information.


Olsen, who completed his service last year, participated in the protest in Oakland because he felt corporations and banks have too much influence on the government, Guy said.

A vigil for him is scheduled to be held Wednesday evening near the Oakland City Hall, she said.



"It's terrible to go over to Iraq twice and come back injured, and then get injured by the police that are supposed to be protecting us," he said.

Shannon said Olsen was hit in the head by a tear gas canister or smoke canister shot by a police officer. He said Olsen had a curved scar on his forehead consistent with a canister

updates are still coming

:(

djones520
10-26-2011, 09:13 PM
Why not find a video that shows the police offering repeated warnings for a long time before they fire the gas cans.

Oh... cause if you did then it wouldn't like like brutal police cracking down on peaceful fleeing protestors. :rolleyes:

Apocalypse
10-26-2011, 09:32 PM
Let me counter.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ieeNvciXULM

Man threating "War" on police. And he's serious, be sending other vids to Paramount about errors in Startrek DS9

http://www.youtube.com/user/pokesomi#p/u/10/9EvmK7wUiPE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEUycHFQmC0

"Peaceful Protesters" throwing objects at the police.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygN6ycg9Zxs

Where officers were surrounded and attacked.



At a late-night news conference, the city’s acting police chief, Howard Jordan, said officers needed to use tear gas after protesters threw rocks and bottles at them…


…The police denied firing flash grenades or rubber bullets at protesters. “The loud noises that were heard originated from M-80 explosives thrown at Police by protesters,” the police said in a statement. “In addition, Police fired approximately four bean bag rounds at protesters to stop them from throwing dangerous objects at the officers.”

Wei Wu Wei
10-26-2011, 09:37 PM
Why not find a video that shows the police offering repeated warnings for a long time before they fire the gas cans.


There was indeed a warning that people may be arrested for not dispersing a few minutes before the tear gas and flash bangs started flying.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7r2ETi5C1A

Wei Wu Wei
10-26-2011, 09:39 PM
Let me counter.


A counter to what? This guy is seriously injured, and it is sad. I don't now if he personally was doing anything violent, or if he was merely exercising his right to assembly.

Wei Wu Wei
10-26-2011, 09:45 PM
"Peaceful Protesters" throwing objects at the police.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygN6ycg9Zxs

Where officers were surrounded and attacked.

I didn't see any objects being thrown at police but maybe it's just because it's far away. I'll take your word for it for the sake of discussion, because I absolutely do think that some protesters are going too far in their resistance.

That is not cool, and if they want to exercise their power, they shouldn't be using violence against the police. If they want to break the law and assert their will, they should do it peacefully. They should sit down, and accept being arrested if that's what the police want to do. If the police decide to attack them, they need to turn the other cheek.


I think today's movements are missing a major religious element that made previous movements successful. The civil rights movement was led by religious leaders, which provided a strong ethical backbone to the protests, and fostered a sense of moral high ground, which gave people the strength to withstand attacks without fighting back.

I hope the protesters are able to summon this kind of strength, instead of lashing out and making things worse.



Regardless of all of that though, my heart is with Scott Olsen, I hope he survives this without any permanent injuries :(

Apocalypse
10-26-2011, 10:17 PM
I had to do a little digging on Scott Olsen. And if I did it right, then lets see what this guy believes in.

1. He is a out spoken member of IVFP. (Iraq Vets For Peace).

2. Owns a web site called iHateTheUSMC.com (http://ihatetheusmc.com/)

Some of his better postings.


You think we are unsat? What about all the married SNCO’s and NCO’s who go out on deployment sticking their worthless dicks into anything wearing a skirt? To you that’s ok right? Or the highers who care nothing for the welfare and the lives of their marines, only how hard they can work them to improve their career prospects. I guess you think that’s ok too in your eyes, right? All the corruption, backstabbing and immorality being done by active duty marines and you focus on the guys on a website venting their anger. That is unsat. How about you fix the problem instead of punishing rogues you spawned through years of maltreatment? Just because we signed a contract guaranteeing you 4 years, that doesn’t give you a green light to abuse and overwork us for your own gain. The festering cesspool of corruption and idiocy that is the MC does not rely on competence, intelligence or skill. It relies on people with limited horizons, a fear of getting out and facing the real world, and above all, blind obedience to any idiotic order. When I was in and my friends would ask me what exactly I did in the MC, I would say “I slavishly obey the insane commands of a baboon.” The MC is like a scientist who makes one great discovery and rides on that discovery for the rest of their career, accomplishing nothing else but always citing the glory days of old. The new MC has no resemblance to the old MC that accomplished many great things, yet the highers and boots alike constantly cite the old glories in which they played no part. The MC also is very similar to Hitler’s SS. In the SS, an order was always right, and they were trained to obey orders without thinking. It’s similar not just because of the blind obedience, but also because of the propaganda. Hitler’s SS heavily relied on propaganda images the media portrayed of them. Disciplined, well groomed, professional, someone to look up to and consider a role model. Yet history revealed the reality. The MC relies on the media in a similar fashion. All the images you see on TV glorify the MC. Plus, they closely monitor everyone, like the Gestapo. When people praise and rant on about the good things, they love it, but when a site like this comes to their attention, they move with expediency to crush the opposition. When the truth, or at least bad press comes out, they go into a conniption. We are made to look like moral people with the utmost professionalism, yet I have personally seen NCO’s and SNCO’s cheat on their wives, steal, abuse drugs and other things. Always Faithful my butt. Does that motto not extend to one’s personal life? Does cheating on one’s wife not violate Always Faithful? The real MC motto should be “Look out for number one.” The totalitarian like state in which the MC operates is very reminiscent of Hitler’s third Reich. To the MC, there is no higher honor than sucking your commander’s cock, swallowing his man gravy then following his senseless and often insane orders without giving it any cognitive thought. I spent four years as a janitor. That is the greatest qualification a marine can claim. The mind numbing stupidity of those in charge, the games and all else drive some to suicide. Only in a dysfunctional organization would the idea of mass punishments be glorified and frequently used. When my friends asked me if I was going to re-up, I would say something like “hell no, I would rather suck the jizzm out of a dead faggot’s rancid, decomposing butthole. One thing I will never comprehend is why do some SNCO’s hold shave inspections and cammie inspections before combat operations? For God’s sake, some of the men you are inspecting may not survive, and you are harassing them with something so mundane? I had better stop, because I could write a manifesto on the problems with the MC. I must say this: the problem is NOT the MC itself. The organization cannot do stupid things. What makes us hate the MC is the SNCO’s and officers who make our lives hell for their own benefit or amusement. I will end with this: To all who have served, thank you for serving, and congrats on getting out. To those still in, your EAS will one day come. It seems like it won’t, and you begin to think that time is looping on itself causing you to stay in longer, but don’t worry. When you EAS, you get back your soul, the water is more refreshing, the food tastes better, your bed is softer, the air is sweeter, and life is worth living again.

Yea... I'll side with the cop here.

Wei Wu Wei
10-26-2011, 11:01 PM
Does his having opinions you disagree with take away from his service in Iraq? Does someone's service not count if they come out of it disagreeing with their mission or their organization?

Different people will have different opinions about these questions.

Anyway, http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&safe=off&source=hp&q=%22scott+olsen%22+%22ihatetheusmc.com%22&pbx=1&oq=%22scott+olsen%22+%22ihatetheusmc.com%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=1&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=166719l172442l0l176724l32l19l0l0l0l0l620l43 89l0.9.5.2.1.1l19l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.,cf.osb&fp=dc20b2672385f007&biw=939&bih=491

I couldn't find anything on google about scott olsen's ownership of that site or authorship of that post. You might be right, I don't have all the facts, but can you point me towards the right direction of your sources?

Apocalypse
10-26-2011, 11:34 PM
I couldn't find anything on google about scott olsen's ownership of that site or authorship of that post. You might be right, I don't have all the facts, but can you point me towards the right direction of your sources?
I did, thou like I said "If I did it right" which also means I could have f'ed it up. Thou what I found says he's tied to that site some how, ether in forming it or some thing.

I love the sites I use to look stuff up like this. Like where our server is and who its through.

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b211/Dispel_Illusions/Capture-8.jpg

Zathras
10-26-2011, 11:37 PM
I didn't see any objects being thrown at police but maybe it's just because it's far away.

I watched the video and caught at least 6 objects thrown at the police by protestors:

At 0:33 and 0:38 from the right of the video.
At 0:36, 0:38 and 0:45 from the bottom of the video.
At 0:54 from the top of the video and land between the 2 parked cars.

txradioguy
10-27-2011, 03:16 AM
I watched the video and caught at least 6 objects thrown at the police by protestors:

At 0:33 and 0:38 from the right of the video.
At 0:36, 0:38 and 0:45 from the bottom of the video.
At 0:54 from the top of the video and land between the 2 parked cars.

Wee Wee didn't see anything because he wasn't looking.

He heard/saw what he wanted to hear and see and disregarded the rest.

Bailey
10-27-2011, 06:11 AM
I dont give two shits if he served in Iraq or not, that doesnt give someone a pass to break the law. When the cops tell you to leave and I am just guessing here YOU LEAVE. They were looking for a fight and they got one, tough shit that he took a gas can to the skull.

Bailey
10-27-2011, 06:32 AM
You know what pisses me off most about this story? 99% (no pun intended) of the leftists couldnt give two shits about vets of any war but now all of a sudden they use this idiots service as a weapon. Ugh if they think I will come around to their point of view using such bullshit like this they are more dumber then I thought.

Witmaster
10-27-2011, 06:50 AM
I love this....

People trying to justify their position against law enforcement by invoking a U.S. marine who was engaged in a riot against the police.

I don't care what branch of the military you serve in, what wars you were deployed to or what rank you achieved. Your status as a "Veteran" does not give you license to break the law or take part in any organized demonstration that incites violence against this nations law enforcement officers.

Using his status as an "Iraq War Veteran" as some sort of ploy to justify his association with acts of violence against law enforcement; while demonizing the Oakland P.D. is nothing less than a blatant act of disrespect for the Military and all-too typical of the leftist agenda.

txradioguy
10-27-2011, 07:40 AM
I love this....

People trying to justify their position against law enforcement by invoking a U.S. marine who was engaged in a riot against the police.

I don't care what branch of the military you serve in, what wars you were deployed to or what rank you achieved. Your status as a "Veteran" does not give you license to break the law or take part in any organized demonstration that incites violence against this nations law enforcement officers.

Using his status as an "Iraq War Veteran" as some sort of ploy to justify his association with acts of violence against law enforcement; while demonizing the Oakland P.D. is nothing less than a blatant act of disrespect for the Military and all-too typical of the leftist agenda.

Well said!

Tipsycatlover
10-27-2011, 07:48 AM
What caused this riot was the area was ordered cleared for cleaning. Yep, this is how children behave when Mom wants to clean their room.

This is why they are called shitters. Only partly because they shit in the street, partly because they like living in it.

Zathras
10-27-2011, 10:41 AM
A counter to what? This guy is seriously injured, and it is sad. I don't now if he personally was doing anything violent, or if he was merely exercising his right to assembly.

Right to assembly is one thing....provoking the police by throwing objects at them and refusing to obey lawful commands from law enforcement is another. Too bad you're so fucked in the head you can't understand this simple fact.

Rockntractor
10-27-2011, 10:47 AM
This guy who acted more Like Cindy Sheehan then her brave son who died.

djones520
10-27-2011, 10:50 AM
There was indeed a warning that people may be arrested for not dispersing a few minutes before the tear gas and flash bangs started flying.


No Wei, there was clear police warning that chemical agents would be used. Tear Gas would be fired into the crowd. I could clearly understand it in the crappy video's that have come in, they would have been able to as well.

djones520
10-27-2011, 10:51 AM
A counter to what? This guy is seriously injured, and it is sad. I don't now if he personally was doing anything violent, or if he was merely exercising his right to assembly.

No, he was not exercising his right to assembly. He was taking part in what was borderline a riot. If he had been taking part in his legal right to assemble, he would not have been there disobeying lawful orders disperse from an illegal assembly.

Odysseus
10-27-2011, 01:38 PM
A counter to what? This guy is seriously injured, and it is sad. I don't now if he personally was doing anything violent, or if he was merely exercising his right to assembly.
He was participating in a riot. What's sad is that you have finally found two Marines that you can feel something for, and they are both turncoats.

Does his having opinions you disagree with take away from his service in Iraq? Does someone's service not count if they come out of it disagreeing with their mission or their organization?

Different people will have different opinions about these questions.


I love this....

People trying to justify their position against law enforcement by invoking a U.S. marine who was engaged in a riot against the police.

I don't care what branch of the military you serve in, what wars you were deployed to or what rank you achieved. Your status as a "Veteran" does not give you license to break the law or take part in any organized demonstration that incites violence against this nations law enforcement officers.

Using his status as an "Iraq War Veteran" as some sort of ploy to justify his association with acts of violence against law enforcement; while demonizing the Oakland P.D. is nothing less than a blatant act of disrespect for the Military and all-too typical of the leftist agenda.

There was a sign carried at one of the anti-war protests a few years back that summed up the left's take on the troops:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_nMLR3Feb9RM/TAQe4LjPG4I/AAAAAAAAE5A/fFXTx4UYll0/s400/SHOOTOFFICERS3152003frontpage.gif

Wei only has good things to say about us when one of us does something like this Quisling did. Otherwise, he's happy to accuse us of all manner of imaginary atrocities.

djones520
10-27-2011, 01:54 PM
Red X Ody.

Odysseus
10-27-2011, 01:59 PM
Red X Ody.

Thanks much. It's fixed.

Apocalypse
10-27-2011, 02:16 PM
[quote=Odysseus;459990

There was a sign carried at one of the anti-war protests a few years back that summed up the left's take on the troops:


.[/quote]
In the left's defense. They don't actually know what a US Soldier looks like.

Remember back in '06 election when the DNC website created a page showing how much they cared about our troops?

http://www.florida-cracker.org/archives/dncpage.jpg

NJCardFan
10-27-2011, 02:40 PM
A counter to what? This guy is seriously injured, and it is sad. I don't now if he personally was doing anything violent, or if he was merely exercising his right to assembly.

That's peaceably assemble you idiot. Funny how you leftists pick and choose what to read in the Constitution. That said, just because someone served in the military doesn't make one a saint.

Odysseus
10-27-2011, 03:03 PM
That's peaceably assemble you idiot. Funny how you leftists pick and choose what to read in the Constitution. That said, just because someone served in the military doesn't make one a saint.

Oh, c'mon now. How can you have a violent, bloody revolution if you can only peaceably assemble? :rolleyes:

noonwitch
10-27-2011, 03:19 PM
The police have a job to do. Don't get in their way.


I still feel badly for the ex-Marine who got beaten. At least, I will feel badly for him until he sues the police. Then I won't feel anything but contempt for him.

Zathras
10-27-2011, 03:27 PM
The police have a job to do. Don't get in their way.


I still feel badly for the ex-Marine who got beaten. At least, I will feel badly for him until he sues the police. Then I won't feel anything but contempt for him.

And being it's the Bay Area you can bet that's coming as soon as he recovers.

SarasotaRepub
10-27-2011, 05:19 PM
This seems a pretty clear cut case of the Left selectively "caring" about a Marine.

Any other day they'd be just as happy to call him a "Baby Killer" and "War Criminal" like mike_c of DU always does.

I hope he recovers and from what I've heard today his condition is improving.

bijou
10-28-2011, 06:12 AM
Iraq War Veteran Injured at OWS Oakland Founder of IHateTheMarineCorps.com

Morgen on October 27, 2011 at 10:41 pm

Scott Olsen is the Marine Corps veteran critically injured at Occupy Oakland Tuesday night, during a confrontation between the protesters and the police. The latest news is good: his condition has been upgraded from critical to fair and he is apparently conscious and able to respond to doctors and family members. I sincerely wish him a full recovery, and I also hope that a proper investigation is conducted to determine whether police misconduct is responsible for his injuries.

But I ran across something this evening that may add a new dimension to this story. It has been widely reported that Olsen is a member of Iraq Veterans Against the War. But apparently his opposition to the U.S. military and the Marine Corps in which he served runs a little deeper.

The site is no longer live, but Olsen was the founder of IHateTheMarineCorps.com, a private user forum apparently dedicated to bashing the Marine Corps. (click to enlarge) ...http://www.verumserum.com/?p=31617

Bailey
10-28-2011, 06:15 AM
Another swoop and poop by we we.

NJCardFan
10-28-2011, 09:22 AM
Another swoop and poop by we we.

No, it's his usual "I was quickly put in my place so I'll retreat and forget this thread ever existed" tactic.

Odysseus
10-28-2011, 09:31 AM
No, it's his usual "I was quickly put in my place so I'll retreat and forget this thread ever existed" tactic.

QFT.

Apocalypse
10-30-2011, 10:57 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zc_brjWJqZk

Remember...
Obama supports (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/65614.html) the protesters.
Pelosi blesses (http://www.theledger.com/article/20111015/EDIT02/111019558) them.
@AlecBaldwin thinks they're "good" (https://twitter.com/#%21/AlecBaldwin/status/122362298756112384).

SarasotaRepub
10-31-2011, 10:09 AM
Oops!

NJCardFan
10-31-2011, 12:30 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zc_brjWJqZk

Remember...
Obama supports (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/65614.html) the protesters.
Pelosi blesses (http://www.theledger.com/article/20111015/EDIT02/111019558) them.
@AlecBaldwin thinks they're "good" (https://twitter.com/#%21/AlecBaldwin/status/122362298756112384).

Amazing what jokes these people are. So to this idiot, throwing bottles and rocks at police is totally OK but police using equal or greater force in response isn't. And tear gas is hardly a chemical weapon.

djones520
10-31-2011, 12:34 PM
Amazing what jokes these people are. So to this idiot, throwing bottles and rocks at police is totally OK but police using equal or greater force in response isn't. And tear gas is hardly a chemical weapon.

Uhh... yeah it is.

It's just not to the scale of mustard gas, or something like that. But it is a substance controlled by the Chemical Weapons Convention.

Lanie
11-01-2011, 11:28 PM
I had to do a little digging on Scott Olsen. And if I did it right, then lets see what this guy believes in.

1. He is a out spoken member of IVFP. (Iraq Vets For Peace).

2. Owns a web site called iHateTheUSMC.com (http://ihatetheusmc.com/)

Some of his better postings.



Yea... I'll side with the cop here.

He's a sonofabitch, but that doesn't mean the cops have a right to play God with his life.

Zathras
11-01-2011, 11:38 PM
He's a sonofabitch, but that doesn't mean the cops have a right to play God with his life.

Well, that wouldn't have happened if he'd followed the instructions of the police as he should have. Actions have consequences. Scott Olsen's consequences for his failure to obey the OPD was to have a tear gas canister bounce off his head.

Lanie
11-01-2011, 11:41 PM
I watched the video and caught at least 6 objects thrown at the police by protestors:

At 0:33 and 0:38 from the right of the video.
At 0:36, 0:38 and 0:45 from the bottom of the video.
At 0:54 from the top of the video and land between the 2 parked cars.

Well, I was looking at it and it kept freezing up on me. However, what I kept seeing were cops throwing canisters at people. In one case, all the protesters did was come to the aid of the marine that was down. It looks to me like the cops were provoking violence. You know, I used to beat myself up for how I behaved in the past as a protester. Now, I remember what type of behavior got me stirred up in the first place. In all honesty, I think if a cop is getting violent toward somebody who hasn't been violent, then they deserve the bad rep they're getting. For those who say they were not getting violent, yes they were. Throwing a canister at protesters knowing it can hit them is violent. The spark that I saw come out looked pretty violent to me. All over what? Coming to one's aid? That's wrong. You all can support those people just because it's a conservative cause all you want to, but it's wrong. And no, nobody deserves to be drastically hurt for being a sonofabitch. You're not God, and neither are those cops.

Lanie
11-01-2011, 11:43 PM
Well, that wouldn't have happened if he'd followed the instructions of the police as he should have. Actions have consequences. Scott Olsen's consequences for his failure to obey the OPD was to have a tear Gas Canister bounce off his head.

So, if you do acts of civil disobedience, do you deserve to be hurt and to possibly die?

Keep in mind this is what Ghandi, MLK, and others did. I'm not trying to say that marine was honorable like MLK. I am saying that the protesters are using the same tactics. They do not deserve to be hurt and to die no matter how many times people in this thread are going to say they do deserve to be hurt and to die.

marv
11-01-2011, 11:43 PM
He's a sonofabitch, but that doesn't mean the cops have a right to play God with his life.

...but when you voluntarily put yourself in harm's way while breaking the law........http://members.socket.net/~mcruzan/avatars/shrug.gif

Apache
11-01-2011, 11:48 PM
Well, I was looking at it and it kept freezing up on me. However, what I kept seeing were cops throwing canisters at people. In one case, all the protesters did was come to the aid of the marine that was down. It looks to me like the cops were provoking violence. You know, I used to beat myself up for how I behaved in the past as a protester. Now, I remember what type of behavior got me stirred up in the first place. In all honesty, I think if a cop is getting violent toward somebody who hasn't been violent, then they deserve the bad rep they're getting. For those who say they were not getting violent, yes they were. Throwing a canister at protesters knowing it can hit them is violent. The spark that I saw come out looked pretty violent to me. All over what? Coming to one's aid? That's wrong. You all can support those people just because it's a conservative cause all you want to, but it's wrong. And no, nobody deserves to be drastically hurt for being a sonofabitch. You're not God, and neither are those cops.

Sorry Lanie, even Mother Jones said the protesters were the one's spoiling for a fight...

Zathras
11-01-2011, 11:53 PM
So, if you do acts of civil disobedience, do you deserve to be hurt and to possibly die?.

All depends on your actions. Don't provoke the police and you don't have to worry about the tear gas flying.


Keep in mind this is what Ghandi, MLK, and others did. I'm not trying to say that marine was honorable like MLK. I am saying that the protesters are using the same tactics. They do not deserve to be hurt and to die no matter how many times people in this thread are going to say they do deserve to be hurt and to die.

Throwing bottles and rocks at the police is the same thing as what Ghandi, MLK and others have done? Must have missed that part of history.

What I'm saying is the OWieS have to understand that bad things can come from their actions.

Lanie
11-01-2011, 11:53 PM
Okay, so if a person is doing civil disobedience, do they deserve to be gassed out, possibly hit with the canisters, beaten up, and possibly die?

If that's the case, then it would have been justified for cops to kill MLK, Gandhi, or anybody else involved in civil disobedience.

djones520
11-01-2011, 11:54 PM
Okay, so if a person is doing civil disobedience, do they deserve to be gassed out, possibly hit with the canisters, beaten up, and possibly die?

Lanie, you have a better chance of dying everytime you step into your car then by getting hit with a tear gas canister.

Lanie
11-01-2011, 11:57 PM
All depends on your actions. Don't provoke the police and you don't have to worry about the tear gas flying.

It looks to me like the police were doing the provoking in that video. They were using gas to clear out protesters, not necessarily to stop violent ones.




Throwing bottles and rocks at the police is the same thing as what Ghandi, MLK and others have done? Must have missed that part of history.

What I'm saying is the OWieS have to understand that bad things can come from their actions.

The logic of some here in this thread is that if they'd just "follow instructions" then they wouldn't have to worry about cops getting violent with them.

Well, that's the thing. People into civil disobedience are not following instructions. Do they deserve to die?

As for bottle throwing, I'd like to know ALL the details about what went down. I'm sorry, but all I'm seeing in that video are cops throwing things at the protesters. If I came to the aid of somebody who was injured and a cop threw something like that at me, I could see myself throwing something back at them.

Lanie
11-01-2011, 11:58 PM
Lanie, you have a better chance of dying everytime you step into your car then by getting hit with a tear gas canister.

And if the cops are hurting people by playing bumper cars, then I'd fuss about that too. The issue is that the cops are purposely hurting people who often did nothing violent.

djones520
11-01-2011, 11:59 PM
It looks to me like the police were doing the provoking in that video. They were using gas to clear out protesters, not necessarily to stop violent ones.





The logic of some here in this thread is that if they'd just "follow instructions" then they wouldn't have to worry about cops getting violent with them.

Well, that's the thing. People into civil disobedience are not following instructions. Do they deserve to die?

As for bottle throwing, I'd like to know ALL the details about what went down. I'm sorry, but all I'm seeing in that video are cops throwing things at the protesters. If I came to the aid of somebody who was injured and a cop threw something like that at me, I could see myself throwing something back at them.

The risk is inherint. That is why it is called "Less Lethal" not "Non-Lethal". They all made a choice, the consequences are there to be dealt with.

We know that the police had no intention of killing anyone. Nor did they. But if it where to happen, the fault would entirely rest on the one who forced the situation to occur. And that isn't the police.

djones520
11-02-2011, 12:00 AM
And if the cops are hurting people by playing bumper cars, then I'd fuss about that too. The issue is that the cops are purposely hurting people who often did nothing violent.

No Lanie, their not. The cops used standard crowd dispersal techniques against protestors who were doing things violently. A series of unfortunate events led to the injury. That series of events was kicked off by the person who was injured, so it's his fault he sustained that injury.

Zathras
11-02-2011, 12:02 AM
Okay, so if a person is doing civil disobedience, do they deserve to be gassed out, possibly hit with the canisters, beaten up, and possibly die?

If that's the case, then it would have been justified for cops to kill MLK, Gandhi, or anybody else involved in civil disobedience.

Boy, you just do not get it, do you.

Well, I give up then. I don't have the time or patience to explain common sense to someone who seems to have none whatsoever.

Lanie
11-02-2011, 12:06 AM
Amazing what jokes these people are. So to this idiot, throwing bottles and rocks at police is totally OK but police using equal or greater force in response isn't. And tear gas is hardly a chemical weapon.


Okay, IF the bottles and rocks were that bad, then I could see use of force against that. However, I've seen this up close. What sometimes happens is that one or two people are doing something and then the cops use it to excuse taking it out on the entire crowd. That may not have been the case on this case. I will admit that the girl here is being a total ass.

I still don't think that throwing a canister where you know it will hit somebody and doing it because they're responding to somebody who got hurt is appropriate.

I also object to this junk that if the cops instruct you to leave and you don't, then it's fair to go after you violently. Sometimes, I think people just want to support any nasty action for the sake of their cause, just like this girl on the video.

It's still not a black/white issue.

Lanie
11-02-2011, 12:11 AM
No Lanie, their not. The cops used standard crowd dispersal techniques against protestors who were doing things violently. A series of unfortunate events led to the injury. That series of events was kicked off by the person who was injured, so it's his fault he sustained that injury.

How was it kicked off by him? Did he directly get violent with the police?

Next, that's the other thing I'm objecting to. Some here seem to think he deserved what he got because he's some sort of turncoat. I don't hear any objections to that idea.

Rockntractor
11-02-2011, 12:17 AM
Next, that's the other thing I'm objecting to. Some here seem to think he deserved what he got because he's some sort of turncoat. I don't hear any objections to that idea.

Address the posters that said this specifically, and object to what they said post by post. Don't throw a blanket accusation at CUers and expect others to read your mind.

NJCardFan
11-02-2011, 12:21 AM
OK, seems as though someone here needs an education in dealing with mobs. It goes in stages. The first stage is literally asking nicely: "This is the Oakland police department. You are trespassing on private property. Please disperse and return to your homes." Now, chances are, this is met with some resistance. A 2nd warning is given: "Please disperse immediately. This will be your final warning." This is usually the part where the morons decide their best course of action would be to start throwing bottles and rocks at the cops. But don't be stupid Lainie. Cops just don't step in and start throwing tear gas around like it's Christmas candy. Warnings are issued. The idiots are given ample opportunity to go their merry ways. They chose to ignore the warnings and started acting the fool. A beat down is something they deserved.

NJCardFan
11-02-2011, 12:24 AM
Address the posters that said this specifically, and object to what they said post by post. Don't throw a blanket accusation at CUers and expect others to read your mind.

I believe she is referring to some who made reference that this so called Marine was either the owner of or a part of a website called I Hate The USMC or something to that affect. If this is true, then he is a turncoat.

Rockntractor
11-02-2011, 12:27 AM
I believe she is referring to some who made reference that this so called Marine was either the owner of or a part of a website called I Hate The USMC or something to that affect. If this is true, then he is a turncoat.

She can answer their posts and ask them directly other than throwing vague accusations out.

NJCardFan
11-02-2011, 12:28 AM
She can answer their posts and ask them directly other than throwing vague accusations out.
You won't get it. She's a swooper and pooper like wee wee and tno.

marinejcksn
11-02-2011, 12:29 AM
I pray that this man recovers fully from his injuries. Only a sadistic jackass would suggest he "deserved it" or wasn't a real war vet.

That being said...He's typical of many Marines I met while serving. A self diagnosed "idealist" and "free thinker" who hates for the sake of being a hater. I worked my way up, became a Sergeant, Earned the respect of the Marines who worked for me and the officers I worked for, by becoming knowledgeble in my MOS and proving myself on 3 Continents.

Marines like Olsen were a dime a dozen, unfortunetly. Misguided fools who joined the Marine Corps with the idea that they'd be the next Audie Murphy or Marcus Luttrell....who would ride to prominence on the back of military victory in battle and be remembered like Patton, MacArthur, Bradley, McChrystal or Petraeus....and sadly, they end up being what they were in life before they joined the Marines.

A shitbird. A douchebag. A loser. But worse....a loser with a USMC tattoo. Someone who served their country, enjoys the privledges of doing so (VFW and American Legion status, fully paid College under the post 9/11 GI Bill, veterans discounts and the respect of having served) while simultaneously being a piece of crap who never deserved earning the title of US Marine in the first place. Becoming a Marine doesn't require selling your soul to Uncle Sam...but it does involve being highly patriotic, learning a trade, maintaining a warrior mindset and managing and serving younger Marines like an effective leader. That's something men like Olsen will never understand.

Lanie
11-02-2011, 12:30 AM
The risk is inherint. That is why it is called "Less Lethal" not "Non-Lethal". They all made a choice, the consequences are there to be dealt with.

We know that the police had no intention of killing anyone. Nor did they. But if it where to happen, the fault would entirely rest on the one who forced the situation to occur. And that isn't the police.

Well, at least you're being honest enough to admit that death should be a possible consequence. Just keep in mind your logic applies to all those who are breaking the laws to protests, not just those throwing bottles. So yeah, it would include MLK.

Rock, I did respond to those who said the stupid junk. Apocolypse suggested the marine deserved no sympathy because of inflammatory comments. Zathres suggested that they deserved it for not following instructions (he didn't say throwing bottles, but SIMPLY for not following instructions). Guess what happened? People argued with my objection to it. It's not my fault that people want to support a cause or a poster who supports the cause no matter how stupid or immoral some of the arguments go.

Rockntractor
11-02-2011, 12:30 AM
You won't get it. She's a swooper and pooper like wee wee and tno.

I'm afraid you're right, nothing more than a troll.

Lanie
11-02-2011, 12:42 AM
I'm afraid you're right, nothing more than a troll.

I'm not a troll. Just making the point that people don't deserve to die for protesting.

Just to prove my point that I did respond to those particular posters.

http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showpost.php?p=459847&postcount=7

In the above post, Apocolypse said he'd side with the cop simply because this marine declared to hate other marines. I guess being hateful is a capital offense now.

http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showpost.php?p=461023&postcount=41

In the above post, I commented Zathras for the following comment:


Well, that wouldn't have happened if he'd followed the instructions of the police as he should have. Actions have consequences. Scott Olsen's consequences for his failure to obey the OPD was to have a tear Gas Canister bounce off his head.

So if you simply fail to "follow instructions" then you should have a canister bounce off of your head. No sympathy deserved. The problem with this logic is that all of those who are breaking the law in these protests are failing to follow instructions. They don't have to be somebody throwing bottles. Zathras did not make that distinction in this post.

I missed marv.

http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showpost.php?p=461024&postcount=42


...but when you voluntarily put yourself in harm's way while breaking the law........

So if you break the law, you deserve what you get?

Zathras did respond back to what I was saying with some more clarification although I didn't agree with some of it.

But maybe I'm looking at this the wrong way. Maybe this protester should have listened to his intuition. For example, I get a feeling that if I don't leave right now or agree with people, you might just throw a ban canister at my head. You are a mod and you're going around calling me a troll. Makes sense.

Rockntractor
11-02-2011, 12:46 AM
But maybe I'm looking at this the wrong way. Maybe this protester should have listened to his intuition. For example, I get a feeling that if I don't leave right now or agree with people, you might just throw a ban canister at my head. You are a mod and you're going around calling me a troll. Makes sense.




Persecution complex too, you have it all Lanie.

Lanie
11-02-2011, 12:50 AM
Persecution complex too, you have it all Lanie.

Just following your history and combining it with stuff you say now. Good-night. Sleep tight. Don't let the
Democrats bite.

Tipsycatlover
11-02-2011, 12:54 AM
It all depends on what they DO while they are protesting. Not every act is harmless just because they are protesting! Attack the cops and you get what you get, even if it's a protest. That's why only peaceful protests are legal. Otherwise, like this guy, you can get your head kicked in.

SarasotaRepub
11-02-2011, 08:02 AM
I'm afraid you're right, nothing more than a troll.


Now,now. Lanie / Bridget is ok, she has been a long time CUer. :D

Odysseus
11-02-2011, 09:55 AM
So, if you do acts of civil disobedience, do you deserve to be hurt and to possibly die?
If your act of civil disobedience endangers the lives of others, then yes. Throwing bottles and rocks takes you from passive resistant to violent mob member. When you cross that line, the Rules of Engagement change accordingly.


Keep in mind this is what Ghandi, MLK, and others did. I'm not trying to say that marine was honorable like MLK. I am saying that the protesters are using the same tactics. They do not deserve to be hurt and to die no matter how many times people in this thread are going to say they do deserve to be hurt and to die.
King and Gandhi practiced non-violent civil disobedience. Their whole moral stance was based on violating only those laws that singled them out for unequal treatment in order to highlight the injustice behind them. They didn't occupy other people's property, permit their followers to trash their cities, exhort them to violence, cover up criminal acts (including theft and sexual assault) and otherwise break every law on the books in order to make their point. In fact, both of them advocated strict adherence to the laws that governed public safety and protection of people and property during their protests. This is one of the reasons that the more radical elements of the Civil Rights movement denounced King.

Okay, so if a person is doing civil disobedience, do they deserve to be gassed out, possibly hit with the canisters, beaten up, and possibly die?

If that's the case, then it would have been justified for cops to kill MLK, Gandhi, or anybody else involved in civil disobedience.
See above.

How was it kicked off by him? Did he directly get violent with the police?

Next, that's the other thing I'm objecting to. Some here seem to think he deserved what he got because he's some sort of turncoat. I don't hear any objections to that idea.
I was the one who called him a turncoat, because of his website, which is a vile series of slanders of his former Corps members. I didn't say that he deserved to die for being one, but only that Wei only cared for those military members who turn on the rest of us. If a cop who was a former Marine was injured by a rioter, Wei wouldn't have given him the time of day.


Just following your history and combining it with stuff you say now. Good-night. Sleep tight. Don't let the Democrats bite.
Democrats can't help biting the system that feeds them.

Lanie
11-02-2011, 10:25 AM
Now,now. Lanie / Bridget is ok, she has been a long time CUer. :D

Yeah, well I went too far last night. I thought by speaking civilly that I could get a point across. Then I found myself getting pissed off at how far some people were taking their positions and how they spoke to me and then I just got mean and pissy. I'm not going to change any minds like this. To me, the issue isn't so much that the rich should have money taken from them so much as it's the idea of the person on the other side of the fence is not necessarily your enemy and you shouldn't go but so far to support a cause. So yeah, I went too far last night.

marv
11-02-2011, 10:37 AM
Yeah, well I went too far last night...

...To me, the issue isn't so much that the rich should have money taken from them so much as it's the idea of the person on the other side of the fence is not necessarily your enemy and you shouldn't go but so far to support a cause. So yeah, I went too far last night.

Lanie, you have to learn that there is a distinct difference between organized, peaceful protest......and disorganized, violent mob rule.

The police can only react to what faces them. They are not psychologists or psychiatrists, and cannot look into the mind of a mob throwing bricks, rocks and bottles at them.

Lanie
11-02-2011, 10:37 AM
If your act of civil disobedience endangers the lives of others, then yes. Throwing bottles and rocks takes you from passive resistant to violent mob member. When you cross that line, the Rules of Engagement change accordingly.

Ody, I don't recall even seeing your posts last night, so I wasn't addressing you. If somebody is getting violent, then yes, it provokes the police. Some of these people were saying the actions would have been justified just for "not following instructions."



King and Gandhi practiced non-violent civil disobedience. Their whole moral stance was based on violating only those laws that singled them out for unequal treatment in order to highlight the injustice behind them. They didn't occupy other people's property, permit their followers to trash their cities, exhort them to violence, cover up criminal acts (including theft and sexual assault) and otherwise break every law on the books in order to make their point. In fact, both of them advocated strict adherence to the laws that governed public safety and protection of people and property during their protests. This is one of the reasons that the more radical elements of the Civil Rights movement denounced King.

Well, they did in fact occupy property. When somebody did a "sit in," they occupied the restaurant or other place for "whites only." They were not legally permitted to be there, so they were arrested.

When they advocated boycotting the bus system, the idea was to hurt them financially. That's what some here want to happen to the bigger banks. Imagine this. You have some pushy sales person insisting you can afford a loan on a house, and it turns out you really can't. They knew this the entire time. Instead of trying to renegotiate the monthly payment, they get the government to bail them out and they sell the house for let's say two thousand dollars. Don't you think that's bullcrap? Don't you think some of the Occupy protesters have a point? I personally knew a guy who got told that because his late aunt owed money to a nursing home, he'd have to come up with that money or they'd take the house she left him. Well, he couldn't get the money at first, but he finally got it through a bank loan. By then, they wouldn't accept it. They sold his house for like a thousand dollars. They knew they could get away with it because they'd be bailed out. Fortunately, the other person decided they didn't want the house so he got his house back with that money, but you see my point? Some institutions need to be hit where it hurts (the wallet) so they'll stop mistreating people so much.

BTW, I actually expect somebody to come in justifying the above paragraph.


I was the one who called him a turncoat, because of his website, which is a vile series of slanders of his former Corps members. I didn't say that he deserved to die for being one, but only that Wei only cared for those military members who turn on the rest of us. If a cop who was a former Marine was injured by a rioter, Wei wouldn't have given him the time of day.


I'll agree he is a turncoat. I guess there is a reason why he sees the war differently. He can object to the war without having a website about hating the marine corps. My objection was the idea that he deserved what happened to him because of the hateful things he said about marines. That's what somebody in this thread said. I don't agree with that. Now, if the guy was stupid enough to say that to the faces of some marines, I'd have more sympathy if that marine beat him senseless.


Democrats can't help biting the system that feeds them.

And Republicans often have no problem with the government assistance so long as it's for the rich, see above.

txradioguy
11-02-2011, 11:01 AM
Now,now. Lanie / Bridget is ok, she has been a long time troll. :D

Fixed.

txradioguy
11-02-2011, 11:04 AM
Lanie, you have to learn that there is a distinct difference between organized, peaceful protest......and disorganized, violent mob rule.

She never will. That would require Bridget to actually BE HERE for the start of a discussion. Instead in typical swoop and poop fashion she comes in at the tail end of a conversation taht hasn't been commented onin awhile and posts her long winded innane diatribes...then gets pissy and moody when we correct and disect her wrong headed Libtard version of "thought".

She's a long time troll here and this has been her MO for 5 years.

Odysseus
11-02-2011, 11:17 AM
Ody, I don't recall even seeing your posts last night, so I wasn't addressing you. If somebody is getting violent, then yes, it provokes the police. Some of these people were saying the actions would have been justified just for "not following instructions."
Well, if you fail to follow the instructions of the police, you do tend to get what you pay for.


Well, they did in fact occupy property. When somebody did a "sit in," they occupied the restaurant or other place for "whites only." They were not legally permitted to be there, so they were arrested.
Yes, but they weren't "occupying" the property in order to deny the owners the use of it, they were asking for the same service as whites, and they never resisted arrest.


When they advocated boycotting the bus system, the idea was to hurt them financially. That's what some here want to happen to the bigger banks. Imagine this. You have some pushy sales person insisting you can afford a loan on a house, and it turns out you really can't. They knew this the entire time. Instead of trying to renegotiate the monthly payment, they get the government to bail them out and they sell the house for let's say two thousand dollars. Don't you think that's bullcrap? Don't you think some of the Occupy protesters have a point? I personally knew a guy who got told that because his late aunt owed money to a nursing home, he'd have to come up with that money or they'd take the house she left him. Well, he couldn't get the money at first, but he finally got it through a bank loan. By then, they wouldn't accept it. They sold his house for like a thousand dollars. They knew they could get away with it because they'd be bailed out. Fortunately, the other person decided they didn't want the house so he got his house back with that money, but you see my point? Some institutions need to be hit where it hurts (the wallet) so they'll stop mistreating people so much.
Boycotts are the exact opposite of occupation, in that the boycotters refuse to patronize the service or business in question. In doing so, they made the point that the bus company had to treat its customers as equals, and that they would not patronize the buses until the policy changed. The OWS crowd isn't demanding boycotts or disinvestment, they're demanding that government criminalize banking procedures that it imposed in the first place. The reason that we had a subprime mortgage mess in the first place is that the feds accused banks that didn't lend in minority areas of racial bias, without looking at the risk factors in the loans. Instead, they passed legislation that penalyzed banks that didn't make a certain percentage of loans with higher risk factors and made Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac the guarantor of those loans, while socializing the risk of the loans by allowing the banks to issue derivatives against them. It was a massive Ponzi scheme, caused by government malfeasance and manipulation of markets.


BTW, I actually expect somebody to come in justifying the above paragraph.
If you mean that they will justify the bank's actions, I'd have to know a lot more about the situation before I commented.


I'll agree he is a turncoat. I guess there is a reason why he sees the war differently. He can object to the war without having a website about hating the marine corps. My objection was the idea that he deserved what happened to him because of the hateful things he said about marines. That's what somebody in this thread said. I don't agree with that. Now, if the guy was stupid enough to say that to the faces of some marines, I'd have more sympathy if that marine beat him senseless.
I don't care how he sees the war. His site isn't called "ihatethewar.com", it's "ihatethemarinecorps.com." Spitting on the uniform that he once wore is what makes him an icon to Wei, and a lowlife to the rest of us. Do I think that he deserved to be hit by a tear gas canister for being a turncoat? No, although I'm probably not going to lose much sleep over it (but I would like the VA to look at whether his conduct invalidates any of his benefits). However, refusing to leave a violent protest, flinging paint, bottles and rocks at the cops and otherwise being a violent, ignorant tool is pretty much demanding bodily harm, and he got what he demanded.


And Republicans often have no problem with the government assistance so long as it's for the rich, see above.

Some Republicans don't, but Democrats are far more likely to play the crony capitalism game. Solyndria was about putting taxpayer money into a corporation that was owned by Obama supporters, basically funnelling money to his cronies. LightSpeed was a similar scandal, except that it also involved risks to National Security. The auto bailout was a vast income transfer from the boond holders at GM and Chrysler to the unions, and Obamacare has seen similar sweetheart deals through the selective approval of waivers for connected companies and organizations. The Clintons, BTW, were just as bad, going after Microsoft on behalf of Sun Microsystems, which had been a huge Clinton contributor. I stand by my assertion that Democrats bite the had that feeds them.

NJCardFan
11-02-2011, 01:41 PM
You're pissing up a rope Ody. Lanie doesn't have the brain capacity to decipher what you're trying to say. In her world view, it's from each according to his ability to each according to his need.