The second thing is to be aware not everyone at protests are there for the best reasons. Agent provocateurs are common at these gatherings, either inciting the authorities or the protesters depending on their employers needs.
You may laugh at that statement, but I have seen it twice in my time attending protests
Why would the cops actually need to incite incidents, when they can simply ask crowds to disperse, and if they don't, it's that gives them justification?
How do you know who their employers were, or what their needs are? How do you even know they're agents? Did they hand you business cards, promising 20% off your first incited riot?
I met a very few people at Occupy LA who seemed sketchy and who were advocating some really stupid stuff but there is no way of knowing if they were agent provocateurs or just clueless idiots who wanted the same national attention that Oakland had just received.
But, of course, they weren't part of Occupy, oh no.
In every large group of people, there will be those who are quietly dedicated to the cause, those who are there for some personal reward or ideology, and those who are drawn to chaos.
Why would the cops actually need to incite incidents, when they can simply ask crowds to disperse, and if they don't, it's that gives them justification?
How do you know who their employers were, or what their needs are? How do you even know they're agents? Did they hand you business cards, promising 20% off your first incited riot?
...
The second thing is to be aware not everyone at protests are there for the best reasons. Agent provocateurs are common at these gatherings, either inciting the authorities or the protesters depending on their employers needs.
...
Not in the two instances I witnessed. In fact in one of them, there was a chance police officers could have been badly hurt by the actions of these men.
We hear from time to time stories of undercover police taking an active roll in generating riots, but who really knows
You also missed my question about how you even know they're agents, or what their employers pay them to do.
In both instances I saw - as well as some footage I have seen in European protests, the instigators seemed to melt into the crowd and disapear once the violence begins.
Generally it seems to me people passionate enough about a cause to confront authorities tend to keep going until either injured or overpowered. Riots do tend to follow a pretty standard template and when you see variations of that template you see signs of external influence in the event
I am specifically saying that Occupy LA had some people and that I have no idea what their motivation was - to instigate something on behalf of another party, or to gain attention for Occupy LA. The last one obviously links them to Occupy.
This selective editing - of the hundreds of videos that have come out, what percentage have been edited?
Not in the two instances I witnessed. In fact in one of them, there was a chance police officers could have been badly hurt by the actions of these men.
We hear from time to time stories of undercover police taking an active roll in generating riots, but who really knows
In both instances I saw - as well as some footage I have seen in European protests, the instigators seemed to melt into the crowd and disapear once the violence begins.
Generally it seems to me people passionate enough about a cause to confront authorities tend to keep going until either injured or overpowered. Riots do tend to follow a pretty standard template and when you see variations of that template you see signs of external influence in the event
A group three men came towards mounted police officers, threw marbles under the horses legs, causing them to stumble in to the protestors they were protecting from traffic. The protestors thought the police were trying to force them away from the protest. Mayhem ensured
Second situation - large mass of students protesting increase in tuition fees. A group of ten men attacked the police and protestors with baseball bats - then withdrew during to subsequent violence
I am specifically saying that Occupy LA had some people and that I have no idea what their motivation was - to instigate something on behalf of another party, or to gain attention for Occupy LA. The last one obviously links them to Occupy.
This selective editing - of the hundreds of videos that have come out, what percentage have been edited?
It's kind of hard to find an exact number, as it would be to find the counter, but every single time I've been able to find more information on what Occupy deems police brutality, I find facts inimical to its image have been left out. Most notably, the UC Davis incident.
Compare with this video, which clearly shows the crowd of students surrounding and issuing threats (7:00)to the police. It also shows that the police were attempting to transport prisoners. They had taken down Occupy tents, after warning the protestors, and were actually leaving them alone, barring the prisoners, who had interfered with them. The students decided to surround the police and demand the prisoners be released, or they would not "let [the cops] go" or "continue to protest peacefully".
At the very least, the story is dramatically different from the popular version. The first two, which seem to be the most popular on Youtube, start a few seconds before Lt. Pike uses pepper spray. Even the third starts about a minute or so out. All three of them leave out the fact that the students confronted the police, not the other way around, and the sitting students were deliberately obstructing them, not "peacefully protesting". One might claim that use of pepper spray was unjustified either way, (and there's a thread for that) which immediately leads to the question of why the context was edited out. Either someone thought it was irrelevant*, or they were actively trying to hide it.
*One cannot say or imply force is excessive unless one knows what it is in response to. The "peaceful protestors" claim implies it is in response to the students merely protesting, and we can see that's not the case. It is relevant, at the very least, so anyone thinking it wasn't is incorrect.
A group three men came towards mounted police officers, threw marbles under the horses legs, causing them to stumble in to the protestors they were protecting from traffic. The protestors thought the police were trying to force them away from the protest. Mayhem ensured.
Second situation - large mass of students protesting increase in tuition fees. A group of ten men attacked the police and protestors with baseball bats - then withdrew during to subsequent violence
Neither of those preclude the possibility of random people being dicks. There are plenty of people who would have both the cops and the protestors die in a fire.
These weren't very good agents if they attacked both sides.
I didn't ask the OP because he said where he'd gotten his information and you did not. I was curious as to whether you were an armchair critic or actually took the time and trouble to go check it out for yourself. And you've confirmed the former. As I said, why should I hear you out? You have no better sources than the OP. The OP has one opinion and you have another and you both got your information from media and YouTube.
Are you serious?
We had live to air coverage from more than one media outlet here (it must have been a very slow news week) over the course of a few days leading up to their ultimate eviction. These outlets were from both 'sides' of the political spectrum.
We also had live coverage from the Occupy Melbourne people themselves as well as the live interviews I heard from the organisers themselves (and I use that term loosely - they couldn't have organised a piss up in a brewery from what I could tell).
I also found these people particularly interesting because they were railing against the western capitalist culture etc yet were able to afford designer clothes and the latest technology. No doubt their mummies and daddies bought that stuff for them because I doubt many of them had jobs.
But why would I want to travel to the city to get first hand knowledge? So I can post on an internet forum about how I saw dozens of feral morons in person, and can thus speak with authority on an internet forum.
You may not have noticed but this is the information age - and we get a lot of information if we choose to seek it.
I was commenting more on how people seem willing to make decisions based on the first information that is presented to them, rather than actively seeking more out, as you have done. I wasn't calling you intellectually lazy.
I was commenting more on how people seem willing to make decisions based on the first information that is presented to them, rather than actively seeking more out, as you have done. I wasn't calling you intellectually lazy.
I dunno. The thing about this information age is that it's also the transportation age. When OWS had a roadshow to HK, I hopped on the MTR and went down to see what real hippies looked like. Man, was I disappointed! Looked like the same crowd who were demonstrating for universal sufferage last year and I swear I smelled freshly applied deoderant.
I have no doubt that there are groups within groups in OWS - the very lack of cohesion sort of mandates that to be true. I do know what demonstrations are like, though and for the most part, people prepared to commit acts of civil disobedience are usually prepared to get roughed up or arrested. It's part of the gig and they want the coverage. Back in my day we had to stand around and shout, "The Whole World is Watching" to hope to get the CBS cameras turned on the crowds. Today, everyone has an iPhone or video camera in their pocket, so there are just more channels to get videos from.
Having watched a lot of the coverage, thus far I see nothing extraordinary - either in the "mobs" activities nor in the police reaction. I've been in a police riot, thank you. The cops in Melbourne and at UC Davis do not seem out of control.
No, I'm not joking. This is the internet and it's serious business. Do you have evidence that I haven't seen? As I said, I've been in a police riot and know what out of control cops look like. I don't see anyone out of control. I see demonstrators doing their demonstrator thing and cops doing their cop thing.
If you have evidence of police running amok, please show it. (I specifically mentioned Melbourne and Cal Davis.)
I don't think "I've been in riots and I know the actions they took weren't out of the ordinary" is a great defense. If this is expected behavior for riot police, then that's a problem.
I don't think "I've been in riots and I know the actions they took weren't out of the ordinary" is a great defense. If this is expected behavior for riot police, then that's a problem.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
