Confirmation that Oak OWS assaulted cops first
 

This from Mother Jones and the left oriented SF Chronicle.


Divisions in the #OccupyOakland Protest Seed Unrest | Mother Jones





So much for cops assaulting peaceful protesters.

Re: Confirmation that Oak OWS assaulted cops first
 

If you're going to cut and paste (ie, cherry pick), you should make it clear you're doing so -- unless you're intentionally trying to mislead people. Right after the first part you quoted comes this: "... Protesters had balked at what they saw as disproportionate policing: They'd been teargassed once already. But how to respond was a matter of intense debate in the crowd of about 1,000..."

That means the title of your thread is false.


and so much for the violent protestors representing all of OWS

"..."You don't need to be splitting this ******* movement!" one man yelled at a guy holding a bullhorn who had been trying to reassure police of the group's peaceful motives. He was angry that the man with the megaphone had characterized a group of demonstrators as violent. "You don't have to be doing their ******* work for them!" he yelled.

No one appeared in control and the group was divided into two groups: the largely peaceful, and a small, visible, determined group of agitators..."

Re: Confirmation that Oak OWS assaulted cops first
 

From your cited article:
He said they'd also been pelted with glass and vinegar, and one officer claimed to have tasted urine in the mix.

How would he know?








So much for cops assaulting peaceful protesters.[/QUOTE]

Re: Confirmation that Oak OWS assaulted cops first
 

The mixture hit his face.... when it was thrown at him.

Re: Confirmation that Oak OWS assaulted cops first
 

Really enjoy when the right picks a progressive source to lie about what happened..

Proof??? Interesting the threshold they will stoop to, to make a point.

This is thread #206 on this subject.. 98% have proven to be epic fail, keep googling though.

Re: Confirmation that Oak OWS assaulted cops first
 

Why are yopu ignoring Chico's post?

Here's the thing. Protesters vs. police is never a good thing. They are protesting the Establishment. When the Establishment shows up to confront them with weapons of bodily destruction, the protesters will frequently react. That's what happens. In fascist states, the protesters are murdered en masse. Then their families are sent to prison or killed. In the US (at least recently), the worst that happens is what we saw in Oak. Most of the time, the police are disciplined enough to protect the demonstrators. In this case, the police escalated and reacted with too much force, IMO.

Your unwavering and silly defense of the police lets everyone know that you're a pro-Establishment, status quo guy who feels safe in a police state compared with others who see the demonstrators as representative of the majority of Americans who feel that the Establishment is criminal and abusive of their status and responsibility.

Have at it and keep digging, cherry-picking and rationalizing your bankrupt point of view.

Re: Confirmation that Oak OWS assaulted cops first
 

We are limited to 4 sentences by forum rules, so one has to edit the post to fit within the rules. This is why a link to the complete article was provided.

BTW the articles cite a group of 50 that started trouble previously at a different location, neither reporter witnessed what transpired directly.

Love the personal attack on me as usual from you.

Re: Confirmation that Oak OWS assaulted cops first
 

and that's why you left out the very next sentence, which directly contradicts your thread title, huh? and why you didn't in any way indicated that you had left it out...

"...They'd been teargassed once already..."


Where is there a "personal attack" on you, 13?

And even if there were one - which there wasn't -- given your personal attacks on me and others here, so what?

Re: Confirmation that Oak OWS assaulted cops first
 

Re: Confirmation that Oak OWS assaulted cops first
 

How does he know what urine tastes like??

Is it a personal preference??