Dr.Traveler
Mathematician
- Aug 31, 2009
- 3,948
- 652
- 190
Could be, but these Militias are pretty much a myth cooked up by the Clinton justice department (Witch Hunter Janet Reno.)
Militia Group Sought to Spark Uprising.
Anti-Abortion Violence.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Could be, but these Militias are pretty much a myth cooked up by the Clinton justice department (Witch Hunter Janet Reno.)
They were in Oakland last night burning, destroying property, and being violent?Could be, but these Militias are pretty much a myth cooked up by the Clinton justice department (Witch Hunter Janet Reno.)
Militia Group Sought to Spark Uprising.
Anti-Abortion Violence.
Extremists are violent by nature.
Witness the Militia groups on the Right that were active during the Clinton days and are active now Obama is President.
Folks that blew up abortion clinics, planned attacks on police, etc.
The problem is that it's harder to recognize an extremist when you're on their end of the spectrum. Then there's also the fact that any protest will attract its share of extremists.
I did.
Then in addition to the passages you selectively quoted, you must have read this:
"Organizers in Oakland had viewed the day as a significant victory. Police said that about 7,000 people participated in demonstrations throughout the day that were peaceful except for a few incidents of vandalism."
Like I said, the protest was still peaceful, although it did break the law (civil disobedience always does that). We don't even know for certain that the people who committed the vandalism and arson were part of the protests. Even if they are, they represent only a tiny fraction of it.
YOU said no one knows if the violence - burning, destruction of property, etc. - was from the protesters then you even admonished a poster for not reading the piece.I did.
Then in addition to the passages you selectively quoted, you must have read this:
"Organizers in Oakland had viewed the day as a significant victory. Police said that about 7,000 people participated in demonstrations throughout the day that were peaceful except for a few incidents of vandalism."
Like I said, the protest was still peaceful, although it did break the law (civil disobedience always does that). We don't even know for certain that the people who committed the vandalism and arson were part of the protests. Even if they are, they represent only a tiny fraction of it.
The left is about violence, always.
I'm sure that will be effective.
I'm sure that will be effective.
Do you think burning stores is effective for the Shitters? Think your stock went up with that?
But the police had no reason to use violence against the TP - we followed the law on all occasions.
OWS didn't.
But the police had no reason to use violence against the TP - we followed the law on all occasions.
OWS didn't.
By the way, this is a point worth going back to. The biggest difference between the OWS and the TP has been a difference of maturity. The TP tended to be folks that were more experienced and mature, and as such they did a damn fine job kicking out the KKK and other extremists that showed up. That helped them stay inside the law.
The OWS is a bunch of kids. That's what has really terrified me about them from the word go. I'm sympathetic, but they scare me because they just plain don't know better.
Outside that, there is some considerable overlap. If some of the OWS kids had really listened to what the TP stood for, they'd have likely marched with them and learned something.
I did.
Then in addition to the passages you selectively quoted, you must have read this:
"Organizers in Oakland had viewed the day as a significant victory. Police said that about 7,000 people participated in demonstrations throughout the day that were peaceful except for a few incidents of vandalism."
Like I said, the protest was still peaceful, although it did break the law (civil disobedience always does that). We don't even know for certain that the people who committed the vandalism and arson were part of the protests. Even if they are, they represent only a tiny fraction of it.
YOU said no one knows if the violence - burning, destruction of property, etc. - was from the protesters then you even admonished a poster for not reading the piece.
The piece itself said the violence was from the protestors.
So, what are the police supposed to do whenever a mob refuses to follow their lawful orders?You must spread more reputation around before giving it to editec again.
Oakland was where the police first started acting violently towards the protesters, and now surprise surprise, there's violence.
Dragon, sare you condoning "a few incidents of vandalism"
Does that make all of the breaking of laws alright?
This exact same reaction would have occurred if the police had used violence against the Tea Party.
YOU said no one knows if the violence - burning, destruction of property, etc. - was from the protesters then you even admonished a poster for not reading the piece.
The piece itself said the violence was from the protestors.
It offered no proof of this, however. So no, we don't know. What we DO know is that only a small number of people participated in the vandalism and arson, so to the protest movement as a whole did not.
This exact same reaction would have occurred if the police had used violence against the Tea Party.
They were never given a reason to. You didn't see the kind of behavior from the tea party that we've been seeing from OWS.