Voidwar

To a citizen watching, does it look like violence ?

That is all it need do, to meet the police goal of intimidating the populace.

The man was taken down by force in the video. I have lost nothing, because you don't realize it doesn't matter if the cops were faking it, it looks like violence, and thus works toward their end of intimidating the citizenry.


Read harder. I don't need to convict this guy. I can simply condemn him.
I can say, in this discussion among citizens, that this guy is doing an underhanded and poor job, and we should fire him and anyone involved in this dishonest incident.

I don't need proof. This ain't a court of law or a trial. As a citizen, I can simply assert that this guy does the job in a dishonest way, and I do not approve. Citizens are still the boss of the cops right ? We still have the right to vote in a new mayor to fire the police chief, and clean up the department, right ?

LOL Squirm Squirm Squirm LOL

What was the rock for ? Oh a "prop" ? Puh - leeeeze.

His "prop" is what got him caught, because it made him stand out from the protestors.

You make me laugh with your "thats my story and I'm stickin to it" transparency.

He brought the rock to act as an "agent provocatuer" and anyone with any sense knows it. You can supply your poppycock excuse all you like, but no-one finds it believeable. It just costs you any credibility on the subject.

Lerxst

Squirm? What? Did you just throw that in there for filler? I squirmed not once. I have been completely in control of this little tryst of ours and handled your argument with relative ease.

The claim you made, along with the OP and some others, was that the cops were inciting violence. Once you finally realized that accusation had no evidence to substantiate it, you then shifted to "intimidating the citizenry." And your evidence was the cops staging a takedown, huh? Except according to you the protesters and the cops knew the guys were infiltrators so the arrest had no impact. And unless the arrest was planned, which I highly doubt it was because that would mean their officers would be taken out of the crowd an unable to report on the protesters, then your point is without merit. The whole concept of inciting violence is to provoke a confrontation between two groups or individuals. The police were not out there inciting violence against themselves. That is just stupid.

So it looks like I have bested you again Voidwar. You got mad at the police, spouted a bunch of insinuations and speculation, tried to pass it off as factual, and once challenged you watched the bottom fall out of your case.

You can want this to be part of your theory that the cops were out there trying to incite violence, but it didn't happen that way. Some cops, who were not very good at their mission, tried to infiltrate the protest group, and got caught. That is as exciting as this is going to get. You can't prove it otherwise.

I accept your argument that you feel their activity was underhanded, and that you condemn them for that. We all are entitled to our opinions. I feel there was nothing wrong at all with the premise, the execution however was very Bush league. But this is a far cry from your original campaign of "the cops were inciting violence."

The citizenry are not the "boss of the cops." The police protect and serve them, but they are not the boss. The Police Chief and the Sheriff are the bosses. Elected officials make laws, cops enforce them. Law enforcement decision makers craft policy and procedure based upon the laws the political leaders make and implement them to protect society. Ultimately the cops answer to the citizens, but not in the direct fashion I think you would like them to.

__________________
I was so right. And you? Well you were so wrong. You lost. Ha. Ha.

Voidwar

Yawn, you talk a bunch of "i win" crap, but thats just in your own mind.

The dishonest dirtbag cop had a rock, and you're just the cop claimin cops can do no wrong, desperately calling a piece of concrete a "prop". Your credibility is zero. You both look completely sleezy.

Tell yourself "you won" some more, make it into a song and sing it to yourself.

The Rock was a "prop" Um, yeah.

Voidwar

I might respond to a quote, but not this rewording.

You habitually try to reword other people's statements.

Here is what I said :

Lerxst

I reworded nothing. I gave a summation. I also asked you specifically about the cops inciting violence because I know your history of back peddling and deception. You answered in the affirmative, as I knew you would. And, just as I knew you would, once you were collared on your unsubstantiated statements you began trying to escape from them. Which makes it all that more amusing that you accuse me of squirming.

Let's look at evidence against you and put your contradictory statement into the proper light:

Question & Answer...
Question & Answer...
Question & Answer...
The OP is quite clear. You did in fact support the OP and answer in the affirmative. My summation of your posts stands as completely accurate and truthful. Your dodging is duly noted and preserved for all to see.

talloulou

I admit I have a problem with this. I'm all about allowing peaceful protests and then on the flip side I'm all for the cops shutting everything down and clearing the streets when violence erupts or property gets damaged.

I'm very uncomfortable with the idea that police officers might attempt to dress the part and act in a threatening manner in order to justify clearing the streets and shutting everything down.

A cop can dress the part of a protester to infiltrate the protest circles but once said cop picks up a rock and looks menacing as opposed to just looking like another protester then what they're really doing is providing the means to justify clearing the street.

It would be like if you were allowed to party on the beach provided you didn't start bonfires. Then an undercover cop comes along dressed like a beach party person and starts a bonfire so the other cops can come in and justify shutting down the party.

That's not right.

Lerxst

Well I suppose it's a good thing the cop didn't do what you described.

talloulou

He donned a costume and picked up a rock giving off a menacing appearance.

How did he NOT do that?

Lerxst

Menacing to whom? He didn't act like he was going to throw it. He didn't taunt the police, giving them a reason to act. He was just walking around. That is how he did NOT do that.

Your analogy was also off center. In it you described a cop actually committing a crime or disruptive act in order to allow other cops to take action. These cops didn't commit any act. The guy had a rock in his hand, he didn't use it, he didn't act like he was going to use it, he didn't threaten to use it.

talloulou

What was the purpose of the rock? If it was a "prop" what message was it designed to give off?

You're being obtuse.

Fact is there are lots of folks who want cops to break up protests when the protest becomes threatening.

What purpose does having a cop parade around as a threatening protester serve exactly????

You can't say that a guy with a rock in his hand in that context isn't threatening. It most certainly is and as part of a costume the rock is meant to give off a more menacing appearance, clearly.

So what was this cop trying to do exactly??