Welcome to PatsFans.com

Confirmation that Oak OWS assaulted cops first

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by patsfan13, Oct 29, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,234
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -3

    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.
  2. chicowalker

    chicowalker Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    12,378
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -0

    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..."
  3. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    14,493
    Likes Received:
    14
    Ratings:
    +18 / 0 / -1

  4. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,234
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -3



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

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,315
    Likes Received:
    19
    Ratings:
    +19 / 0 / -0

    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.
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2011
  6. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,671
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    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.
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2011
  7. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,234
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -3


    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.
  8. chicowalker

    chicowalker Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    12,378
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -0

    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?
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2011
  9. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,671
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    [​IMG]
  10. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,315
    Likes Received:
    19
    Ratings:
    +19 / 0 / -0

    How does he know what urine tastes like??

    Is it a personal preference??
  11. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    14,493
    Likes Received:
    14
    Ratings:
    +18 / 0 / -1

    Most people have no idea what urine tastes like, 13. Most cops in a potential riot situation are wearing face shields.
  12. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    14,493
    Likes Received:
    14
    Ratings:
    +18 / 0 / -1

    Ok....so I'll give you the paint throwing - but, if you have an ounce of fairness in you, 13, you have to admit no one "tasted" urine because they all had face shields or gas masks in place.

    And the fact that the cops were wearing gas masks surely gives lie to the Oakland police chief saying they never used tear gas.

    [im]http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/OWS-Oakland-SF.jpg[/img]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
  13. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    14,493
    Likes Received:
    14
    Ratings:
    +18 / 0 / -1

    What a falsification of what was actually said in the article cited. Even the police agreed that it was a small rogue element - not part of OWS which was agitating for trouble.

    The police actually confirm the exact opposite of what your title here says, 13.

    Have you no shame at all???

    ]"Occupy Oakland is no longer playing a part in this protest," one officer told me—rogue actors, he suggested, had taken control. And indeed by midnight, the earlier calls for peace had fallen away to catcalls and heckling.
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2011
  14. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    14,493
    Likes Received:
    14
    Ratings:
    +18 / 0 / -1

    Sorry...really big picture there and no way to find the "edit" button so I'll offer correction here.

    I mistakenly said that the Oakland police chief had denied the use of tear gas but upon rechecking discovered that he denied using flash bangs and rubber bullets - his remark about a tear gas cannister hitting an Iraq War Veteran was that he didn't know if it was true or not and he'd have to check with the other agencies there that night to see if it was possible.

    Bad memory - apologies.
  15. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    37,505
    Likes Received:
    24
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -5

    Boo Hoo, Bad Cops
    whaaaaaaaaaaa I want my Mommy.

    Stay away from those stupid friggin flea partys, people that bring kids to them should have their children consficated and for god sake don't go in one of those filthy tents.

    God Damn Haliburton
    God Damn Bush
    God Damn America
  16. Titus Pullo

    Titus Pullo Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2009
    Messages:
    2,613
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    holy fail, pf13. Another embarrassing attempt at demonizing the 99% as a whole. The forum is raking you over the coals for it, as they should be.

    I sense thread bannings any hour now as a result of your increasingly untenable position. We've seen it a few times before, haven't we?

    What's most telling is that you punted to victimhood:

    Where was his personal attack, exactly?

    Please explain, as I will continue to ask you about it. If you have some bizarre understanding of the stated rules of this forum, we'd all like to hear it so we don't keep making the same "mistake."

    What about what that poster said was a "personal attack?" Everyone is anxious to read your explanation, including your 4 or 5 allies here, I'd presume.
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2011
  17. Titus Pullo

    Titus Pullo Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2009
    Messages:
    2,613
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    ^ this ^

    post of the week
  18. Titus Pullo

    Titus Pullo Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2009
    Messages:
    2,613
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    again... where was the personal attack in chico's first post, 13?
  19. Titus Pullo

    Titus Pullo Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2009
    Messages:
    2,613
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    13? ... Still need to know the 411 here so that none of us make the same mistake that chico allegedly did. It's very important, and could go a long way towards erasing perpetual forum confusion on the way you govern (and ban, by extension).

    A moderator asserting that a poster has issued a personal attack is a serious allegation, and shouldn't be bandied about loosely, as I'm sure your mod partner would agree.

    Now, in claiming that chico personally attacked you somehow, one would assume you read chico's post. .... Thus, actually reading the post you're referring to (above), the only thing one can logically deduce from it is that you feel he is:

    1) claiming that you are cherry picking
    2) insinuating the possibility exists that you are lying

    Otherwise, there's nothing in his post that remotely resembles a personal attack. ... So then the question is obvious: Just so that we all understand going forward, is it now (or has it always been?) your belief that suggesting someone 1) is cherry-picking quotes or 2) insinuating that someone else is "intentionally trying to mislead people" is a violation of the forum rules?

    If so, that is a truly amazing interpretation of the stated ToS of our community sub-forum here that you rule. It also provides a stunning moment of clarity in reflecting upon the disciplinary actions you have perpetrated in the past.

    Reflex says hi. He was banned for a similar offense: Doing nothing more than holding a mirror up to your own prose.
    Last edited: Nov 5, 2011
  20. Titus Pullo

    Titus Pullo Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2009
    Messages:
    2,613
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    [[crickets]]

    nothing.

    Very well, 13. I'll let you off the hook, because your silence already is your answer. chicowalker did not commit what constitutes as a "personal attack" by any rational, honest assessment.

    To me, part of being liberal means that empathy and mercy are a given. So I won't carry this any further. ... sad as it's become.

    All we ever ask is that you stop banning people from the forum, and kicking them from threads, just because they question your honesty and back up their position as to why. You've done this before, and it's becoming a real problem for honest and thorough debate here.

    Please moderate better. And think long and hard before creating threads that could easily collapse on you like this one did.
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2011
  21. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Actually I don't think Patters would agree considering how many bullcrap infractions and accusations of personal attacks he has given me. I once got an infraction for saying "Yeah, sure :rolleyes:" because apparently that comment implied that I thought he was lying and if you imply someone is lying then that's the same as calling them a liar and calling someone a liar is a personal attack worthy of an infraction point.

    So maybe you should shut your pie hole and stop whining like a 7 year old girl who just had her pigtails pulled.
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2011
  22. Titus Pullo

    Titus Pullo Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2009
    Messages:
    2,613
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Oh look, it's pack.

    I'm sorry that happened to you. I sense your sarcasm, so it would seem we both agree that suggesting someone is being dishonest is hardly a personal attack at all.

    Thank you for strengthening the case against your only friend here.
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2011
  23. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,315
    Likes Received:
    19
    Ratings:
    +19 / 0 / -0

    One of the moderators here does not comprehend what it means to moderate..

    Instead being content to give out "likes" to a poster who does nothing more than make misogynist attacks on women and ad hominen attacks on everyone else.. one might say the need to be liked is greater than the need to be a moderator.

    Either you lead or you follow, unfortunately this mod does the latter.. which perpetuates the contentiousness of this forum..
  24. Titus Pullo

    Titus Pullo Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2009
    Messages:
    2,613
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    wul hai! ... just checkin' in
  25. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    37,505
    Likes Received:
    24
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -5

    Jesus Christ

    :bricks:
  26. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,234
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -3




    & of you buds dead at the OWS, push who knows how many sexual assaults and robberies.


    Great job there, very typical of you left/anarchist friends. :bricks:
  27. Titus Pullo

    Titus Pullo Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2009
    Messages:
    2,613
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    My god. I can't even understand what you're trying to say here.

    Add "horrible writer" to your many shortcomings.
  28. Titus Pullo

    Titus Pullo Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2009
    Messages:
    2,613
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    curious, how can you ask "what thread are you referring to?" when you appeared in this, the very thread in question, to offer yet another nonsensical retort in the time since?

    The challenge put to you is a very simple one. Faking that you never saw it isn't gonna make it go away.

    So once again: Is it considered a personal attack by the two moderators here if/when a poster suggests someone is a liar, or is lying?

    We know that YOU consider it one, even though it's not a stated rule violation here, based on your vast history of banning/infracting people who call you a liar and show why. We'd like you to explain it once and for all.

    We'd also like to hear from your mod opposite on the issue, so that the forum knows - once and for all - whether it's effectively neutered from suggesting anyone else is lying.
  29. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,234
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -3


    The attack was accusing me of cherry picking lines from the articles I linked to mislead people. I took no action because the poster my not have been aware of the rules about posting articles.

    There was no infraction banning from the thread or any action. I did point out that the poster usually assume/ accuses me of the worst in any situation.

    I am done with this issue.
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2011
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page