Dissent in Pittsburgh

DoireNod

Thousands opposed to G-20 march through Pittsburgh

PITTSBURGH — A vociferous but peaceful group of several thousand people marched for miles through the downtown area on Friday, united by opposition to the Group of 20 summit but expressing a diversity of mostly liberal causes as an army of stone-faced riot police watched their every move.
Dozens of black-clad anarchists were conspicuous among the demonstrators, but there was no sign of the disturbances that had resulted in arrests and property damage a day earlier.
Public safety officials said Friday night that 83 people were arrested at protests and other events and about $50,000 in property damage was done during the two-day summit, which ended Friday. They said a man who smashed store and business windows in the city's Oakland section on Thursday night was responsible for about $20,000 in damage.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dK2BRiGX6JQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bopZT_zhwj4

What do you guys make of this? Is the heavy handed approach deemed appropriate? To me it sounds like the actions of a police-state. It'll be interesting to find out when the destruction of property happened - if it was before or after the deployment of heavy-handed riot cops. I've also seen some videos on youtube where the cops are warning people who appear to be simple passers-by to disperse immediately or be subject to arrest and other police action, including use of riot control agents like gas and rubber bullets!

Overheal

I have a question: who invites 19 major world leaders to come see Pittsburgh?

It appears that there was some property damage that went on the night before, which put riot police on standing orders to disperse the crowd.

However the following day during the Summit things seem to have ran much smoother.

PITTSBURGH - Police in riot gear lined the streets of the Group of 20 host city in an overwhelming show of force Friday as thousands of protesters chanted, waved signs and blew bubbles.

Unlike Thursday, when police tossed tear gas and fired rubber bullets to rout protesters who threw rocks and smashed store windows, Friday's "People's March" through the hilly streets of Pittsburgh produced no serious clashes.

The presence of hundreds of police sparked outrage among the demonstrators, who never got closer than half a mile to the G20 meeting site.

"We don't need the United Police States of America," said Cindy Sheehan, the antiwar advocate who famously protested outside former President George W. Bush's ranch in Texas. "I was telling the cops, 'You're facing the wrong way. Face the banks.'"

The patchwork group of demonstrators voiced their opinions on a myriad of issues, from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to workers' rights to the national debate on health care.

They chanted, "We all live in a fascist bully state" to the tune of the Beatles' "Yellow Submarine."

On Thursday, when demonstrators hit the streets without a permit, sparks flew. About 70 people were arrested and a slew of businesses were damaged.

Mike Nance, 28, a graduate student from Philadelphia, said he had no problem with so-called anarchists vandalizing businesses.

"I don't think property violence is particularly immoral," he said.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/09/26/2009-09-26_massive_police_presence_in_pittsburgh_takes_fight_out_of_protesters.html#ixzz0SEI5pIKT

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/09/26/2009-09-26_massive_police_presence_in_pittsburgh_takes_fight_out_of_protesters.html

I really dont think it justifies Police State sentiment at this time. Tea Party Demonstrations in DC ran much smoother than even this, with 70,000+ protesters in attendance. The mitigating factor in DC was a police force that was highly trained to understand and manage protest. Also whoever organized the Tea Party Express had to have gotten the message out to demonstrators not to do anything stupid, like loot a corner store. Night time is also not a great time to start your protest: it brings with it elements of uncertainty for everyone involved.

Manic Moran

If memory serves correctly, there were two different gatherings. One was pretty much non-eventful, and the other was declared an illegal gathering. If you hang around at an illegal gathering and fail to disperse, then of course you will result in 'heavy-handedness' by the police: They've already told you once, what would you like them to do next? Tell you again?

NTM

JohnMc1

Manic Moran wrote: »

If memory serves correctly, there were two different gatherings. One was pretty much non-eventful, and the other was declared an illegal gathering. If you hang around at an illegal gathering and fail to disperse, then of course you will result in 'heavy-handedness' by the police: They've already told you once, what would you like them to do next? Tell you again?

NTM

One protest had permits and the other didn't.

skelliser

US military on the streets of there own country!
America is or is almost a police state, no two ways about it.

land of the free, ya right!

JohnMc1

skelliser wrote: »

US military on the streets of there own country!
America is or is almost a police state, no two ways about it.

land of the free, ya right!

Police being there during rallies, protests, etc is nothing new. They are there to make sure nothing gets out of hand and everybody protesters or passer bys are safe. That does not make the US a Police state.

Maybe if the Gardai weren't such cowards Ireland wouldn't be in the mess its in with regards to crime. It has well earned the name Bloody Ireland.

skelliser

that first video has guys in military dress and iv seen loads of other photos of national gaurd/army etc.

JohnMc1

skelliser wrote: »

that first video has guys in military dress and iv seen loads of other photos of national gaurd/army etc.

It wasn't just for the protests it was also because the G20 summit. With dignitaries [including Brian Cowen IIRC] they have to keep everybody safe. You're whole "US is Police state" garbage doesn't hold water. This is not a 24/7 thing.

Since you're in Galway maybe you should be more interested in Irish Law Enforcement and stop trying to act like you know anything about US Law Enforcement.

skelliser

lol! Cowen wasnt there! its the G20 summit, do you even understand what that means?

And im quite happy with the gardai in this country thank you very much, they dont go around clad in military fatigues lifting people of the street, reminds me of the stazi.

JohnMc1

skelliser wrote: »

lol! Cowen wasnt there!

And im quite happy with the gardai in this country thank you very much, they dont go around clad in military fatigues lifting people of the street, reminds me of the stazi.

LOL @ you thinking the military is on the street all the time. So spare me the Nazi comparrison BS.

Yes I am sure you are very happy with the criminals getting away with whatever they want in Ireland. Ireland nickname of Bloody Ireland is well earned.

skelliser

JohnMc1 wrote: »

LOL @ you thinking the military is on the street all the time. So spare me the Nazi comparrison BS.

Yes I am sure you are very happy with the criminals getting away with whatever they want in Ireland. Ireland nickname of Bloody Ireland is well earned.

i suggest you look up the word stazi before you post anything!!
and this has nothing to do with ireland, this is the US Politics forum

now go away and look up the stazi, you might learn something

JohnMc1

skelliser wrote: »

i suggest you look up the word stazi before you post anything!!

I suggest you actually research Us Law Enforcement before you post anything.

skelliser

JohnMc1 wrote: »

I suggest you actually research Us Law Enforcement before you post anything.

so you havent bothered to look it up, youve been caught out. go read a history book.

Based on your knowledge so far i probably know alot more then you!

JohnMc1

skelliser wrote: »

so you havent bothered to look it up, youve been caught out. go read a history book.

Based on your knowledge so far i probably know alot more then you!

LOL. You're a delusional one aren't you? Your'e US =Nazi arguement fell flat so now you have resorted to name calling in a roundabout fashion.

:rolleyes:

skelliser

what have the nazi's got to do with this? you are the one mentioning them, i never mentioned them lol!

i said stazi, now go and google that and come back and tell me who they are!

JohnMc1

skelliser wrote: »

what have the nazi's got to do with this? you are the one mentioning them, i never mentioned them lol!

i said stazi, now go and google that and come back and tell me who they are!

Holy Lord that's a just as bad if not worse comparrison. None of your accusation hold any water. Nobody that is being arrested in Pittsburgh is disappearing never to be seen again.

So spare me your melodramatics.

I get it you hate America. No go waste your time on some other board.

skelliser

What?! no i dont hate america btw

you have been found out and now your throwing a tantrum.

you should go and read a history book and come back in a few years.

JohnMc1

skelliser wrote: »

What?! no i dont hate america btw

you have been found out and now your throwing a tantrum.

you should go and read a history book and come back in a few years.

LOL @ you. You are the only one that been found out and throwing a tantrum. Maybe you should take your own advice and you'd see your accusations are wrong and don't make any sense.

skelliser

no you where found out for thinking the stazi were the same as the nazi's! lol! you are clearly out of your depth.

or do i have to explain what found out means now

asdasd

they dont go around clad in military fatigues lifting people of the street, reminds me of the stazi.[sic]

It's Stasi.

In general in Police States the police dont really have to get violent at demonstrations, because the demonstrations dont happen in the first place. they arrest the ring-leaders before anything can get off the ground.

That said the price of liberty is eternal vigilence, and as much as a detest moronic anarchists, a police riot is equally bad, although I dont see evidence of that here.

JohnMc1

asdasd wrote: »

It's Stasi.

In general in Police States the police dont really have to get violent at demonstrations, because the demonstrations dont happen in the first place. they arrest the ring-leaders before anything can get off the ground.

That said the price of liberty is eternal vigilence, and as much as a detest moronic anarchists, a police riot is equally bad, although I dont see evidence of that here.

Careful asdasd. That's making too much sense for him.

tricky D

JohnMc1 wrote: »

It wasn't just for the protests it was also because the G20 summit. With dignitaries [including Brian Cowen IIRC] they have to keep everybody safe. You're whole "US is Police state" garbage doesn't hold water. This is not a 24/7 thing.

Brian Cowen representing us at the G20 is pretty amazing since we're not in the G20 and he only made it to the UN in New York which is a few states away.

JohnMc1 wrote: »

So spare me the Nazi comparrison BS.

Still not looked up Stasi yet, because they're not the same. There's even 5 years between them.

JohnMc1 wrote: »

Ireland nickname of Bloody Ireland is well earned.

Not a very well-known nickname unless you're a few centuries old,



Back on topic, these things do tend to be heavy-handed. The third vid suggests an element of 'kettling' which as a tactic is hopefully losing ground after the recent death in London and implictly involves law-abiding people having rights restricted.

JohnMc1

tricky D wrote: »

Brian Cowen representing us at the G20 is pretty amazing since we're not in the G20 and he only made it to the UN in New York which is a few states away.

Yeah. I got it wrong. For some reason I thought he was at both.

Still not looked up Stasi yet, because they're not the same. There's even 5 years between them.

Yes I have and to infer US Police and/or military is anything like that is stupidity of the highest degree.

Not a very well-known nickname unless you're a few centuries old,

Well its back. Some Irish Papers have called it Bloody Ireland due to all the murders [and actual of punishment for them]

Manic Moran

skelliser wrote: »

that first video has guys in military dress and iv seen loads of other photos of national gaurd/army etc.

Certainly won't have been Federal Army. Outside of delcared states of emergency it is unlawful to use the Army in law enforcement roles in the US.

National Guard is possible. A number of police forces use BDUs (Battle dress uniform) for rough work, they're cheap, easily available, and quite rugged.

US military on the streets of there own country!

Where else did I used to see the Army giving the police a bit of a hand out on the public road... I have this vague recollection...



You don't even need a riot. Apparently simply a dodgy cow will get Irish soldiers on the streets with rifles.

NTM

skelliser

G20 security officials took responsibility Friday afternoon for a video that seemed to depict US troops ‘kidnapping’ a protester.

The military was not involved in the incident, but G20 security did acknowledge that “law enforcement officers from a multi-agency tactical response team” had detained a protester they said was believed to be vandalizing a store.

Video posted at YouTube shows onlookers calling out “what the ****” and “what the **** is wrong with you?” as people in camo uniforms haul a protester along by his collar, shove him into the back seat of a car, and rapidly drive off.

Military members supporting the G20 Summit work with local law enforcement authorities but do not have the authority to make arrests. The individuals involved in the 9/24/09 arrest which has appeared online are law enforcement officers from a multi-agency tactical response team assigned to the security operations for the G20. It is not unusual for tactical team members to wear camouflaged fatigues. The type of fatigues the officers wear designates their unit affiliation.

http://rawstory.com/2009/09/video-appears-to-show-us-troops-kidnapping-protester/



strange how they dont have insignia our badges displaying who they are, three different camos, just about see the digital camo guy kneeling down behind the police officer

skelliser

Manic Moran wrote: »

Where else did I used to see the Army giving the police a bit of a hand out on the public road... I have this vague recollection...

You don't even need a riot. Apparently simply a dodgy cow will get Irish soldiers on the streets with rifles.

NTM

irish army assist the gardai, not do there job for them. Plus 30 years of dealing with subversive organisations who are heavily armed, the gardai are unarmed, no match for the ira so they need the help of the irish army.
imo there is no comparison.

Manic Moran

I've no idea who the guys in Multicam are, but they do appear to be wearing ID cards on their left sleeves.

Police in the US usually wear a nameplate, but I can see how it would be hard to affix one to that armour.

Can't help you with the guy in ACUs either, but the boots don't seem to be military spec.

NTM

Manic Moran

irish army assist the gardai, not do there job for them.

Can you say "Blue Flu Day?"

And I do seem to recall that the Army (and the RDF) do get riot training. There must be a reason for that.

I mean, if it's an issue of simply aiding the Gardai in securing foreign dignitaries, the Army used APCs in 2004.


They even brought a few CVR(T)s from the Light Tank Squadron along.


And finally, as one of the articles says, the Guardsmen who were deployed to Pittsburgh did not have powers of arrest, so I would count that as assistance, not doing the police's job.

NTM

skelliser

imo they are not doing themselves any favours anyway! they're playing into the conspiracy theorist/nwo crowd by doing this.

I dont see why the Pittsburgh police, who are from the pics better equiped, didnt go in, isolate the guy and then arrest him in the first video.

Either way a bunch of lads in military fatigues, pulling up in a unmarked car and bungling some guy into the back and speeding away doesnt look good, if they dont have powers of arrest what were they doing then!

and what happened to reading people there rights!

i just think it doesnt look good at all

Manic Moran

Incidently, here are some Gardai in riot gear.



Seems they have the same problems of identifying marks as the American police in riots gear: Where would you put them?

NTM

skelliser

simple, guys in military fatigues are usually army, in this case we dont know precisely who they are which is my only concern.
why do they have to wear faqtigues, you dont see fbi/dea/atf going around without being clearly identifiable?

guys with shields and body armor are usually riot squad and in the pics iv seen they have police written clearly across there chests.

either way the more i look at that clip the more unprofessional and amateurish it looks, which actually inflames and makes the situartion even worse/unsafe for both the general public and the guys in fatigues.

Overheal

Skelliser wrote:

simple, guys in military fatigues are usually army, in this case we dont know precisely who they are which is my only concern.

Hmmm.

Skelliser wrote:

US military on the streets of there own country!
America is or is almost a police state, no two ways about it.

land of the free, ya right!

Changing the tune of your whistle there a bit methinks, after being discredited by several other contributors here.

Why don't you come back in the morning after you've had a chance to actually read up on wtf you're talking about? You're not really going off of hard evidence here, just an apparent "hunch" that because they are wearing Camoflauge, they are military.

Its a clip on youtube. A short clip on that. I would hardly call it conclusive. Really missing the lead-up of why this individual was taken. You're seeing fangs and crying wolf: it could just be an elephant. Or a walrus. OR a Hippo. ****ing Hippos.

Manic Moran

skelliser wrote: »

simple, guys in military fatigues are usually army

As I said, you can't make that assumption in the US. In fact, because of Posse Comitatus, you usually have to make the opposite assumption.

Pennsylvania State Police (In which Pittsburgh is located) are amongst those police forces which wear BDUs. (Not least, neither multicam nor BDU (both types in the alleged 'snatch' arrest video) are on general issue to the Army or National Guard.) You can make out the 'police' marking on the body armour of one of them in this photo of a raid a couple of months ago.



You can also make out the patch on the guy's right shoulder in the video, which appears to be the Keystone of the PSP.

Compare:




So, when it comes to

in this case we dont know precisely who they are

I'm putting money on the PA State Police. (Unfortunately also known as the Keystone Cops)

The lad was apparently nicked for vandalism.

makes the situartion even worse/unsafe for both the general public and the guys in fatigues.

Can't see how not getting him out of there in a hurry would have been in any way any better, and can see how it could have gotten quite nasty.

NTM

Nodin

JohnMc1 wrote: »

Maybe if the Gardai weren't such cowards Ireland wouldn't be in the mess its in with regards to crime. It has well earned the name Bloody Ireland.

Kindly give examples of this 'cowardice' on the part of the Gardai.

Please explain the remark "It has well earned the name Bloody Ireland", bearing in mind the murder rate here is under the European average.

SLUSK

Manic Moran wrote: »

If memory serves correctly, there were two different gatherings. One was pretty much non-eventful, and the other was declared an illegal gathering. If you hang around at an illegal gathering and fail to disperse, then of course you will result in 'heavy-handedness' by the police: They've already told you once, what would you like them to do next? Tell you again?

NTM

Ever heard of the 1st amendment?

Manic Moran

Ever heard of the 1st amendment?

Yes, but just like every other Constitutional right, it's not unrestricted.

NTM

Overheal

SLUSK wrote: »

Ever heard of the 1st amendment?

Of course. But have you also heard of all the conditions that outline the 1st ammendment? You know, Disturbing the peace, Racism, Slander, Libel, Harrassment - ya know, the Usual.

Similarly protest in order to best serve the public interest needs to be declared and coordinated with the authorities in order to create a safe environment for protestors, police, and onlookers alike. For this reason a permit is sought for the vast majority of protests, and authorities are informed beforehand of peaceful demonstrations. This was not the case on the night of the 24th where looting and vandalism was taking place - in the middle of the night, mind you - what do you think the police were going to do? They are also charged with the protection of All peoples and properties within their jurisdiction. There was No Need for demonstrators to be out there the night prior.

SLUSK

Overheal wrote: »

Of course. But have you also heard of all the conditions that outline the 1st ammendment? You know, Disturbing the peace, Racism, Slander, Libel, Harrassment - ya know, the Usual.

Similarly protest in order to best serve the public interest needs to be declared and coordinated with the authorities in order to create a safe environment for protestors, police, and onlookers alike. For this reason a permit is sought for the vast majority of protests, and authorities are informed beforehand of peaceful demonstrations. This was not the case on the night of the 24th where looting and vandalism was taking place - in the middle of the night, mind you - what do you think the police were going to do? They are also charged with the protection of All peoples and properties within their jurisdiction. There was No Need for demonstrators to be out there the night prior.

You should not need a permission to protest in a free country. Unfortunately USA is no longer a free country. It is becoming a fascist police state.

Overheal

SLUSK wrote: »

You should not need a permission to protest in a free country. Unfortunately USA is no longer a free country. It is becoming a fascist police state.

Conspiracy Forum is that way

---

>

Maybe Pennsylvania is becoming a Fascist State (Damn those Troopers!) but the USA is far from it friend.

We also have the Right to Bear Firearms yet I don't see you bitching because we need a permit to do that.

Manic Moran

SLUSK wrote: »

You should not need a permission to protest in a free country.

It works out. They're allowed protest, and they can say whatever the hell they want. They just have to do so in a place which is ammenable to all parties.

NTM

jank

I wonder what fox and more specifically beck made of this incident?
They probably ignored it as it didn't fit their agenda.

Overheal

jank wrote: »

I wonder what fox and more specifically beck made of this incident?
They probably ignored it as it didn't fit their agenda.

I didnt see CNN coverage on it either. Something about Hillary kissing Bill at some event or something. Then I switched channels: Glenn Beck was covering this video thats making the rounds in schools: The Story of Stuff. He managed to widely discredit many of the 'facts' in the film.

jank

Overheal wrote: »

I didnt see CNN coverage on it either. Something about Hillary kissing Bill at some event or something. Then I switched channels: Glenn Beck was covering this video thats making the rounds in schools: The Story of Stuff. He managed to widely discredit many of the 'facts' in the film.

Ah right the "War on education" well under way!
Good ol beck the nutjob!

Nodin

SLUSK wrote: »

You should not need a permission to protest in a free country. Unfortunately USA is no longer a free country. It is becoming a fascist police state.

From what I can gather, the policing of this event was actually more restrained than in Seattle in 1999. Certainly its nowhere near as violent as what happened in Italy. Much smoke, little fire.

Overheal

jank wrote: »

Ah right the "War on education" well under way!
Good ol beck the nutjob!

if you bother to watch it, glennypoo has a point. The video is misleading at best.

sceptre

skelliser wrote: »

no you where found out for thinking the stazi were the same as the nazi's! lol! you are clearly out of your depth.

or do i have to explain what found out means now

JohnMc1 wrote: »

Careful asdasd. That's making too much sense for him.

You're both being idiotic.

Stop that or I'll put you outside the door.

Politeness is free - start using some. Preferably a lot more.

sceptre

JohnMc1 wrote: »

Ireland nickname of Bloody Ireland is well earned.

Not very well known though apparently - of the top three google results, this thread is two of them and I've never heard anyone use the phrase anywhere I've visited (but then I've only been on three continents so perhaps it's the other parts that use it). Personally I'm more likely to call it "****ing Ireland" depending on my mood.

DoireNod

Nodin wrote: »

From what I can gather, the policing of this event was actually more restrained than in Seattle in 1999. Certainly its nowhere near as violent as what happened in Italy. Much smoke, little fire.

Sure, it's not the most brutal of riot-policing, but how does one justify the use of tear-gas and subjection to terror on innocent (if ignorant) college kids and concerned (nosey) passers-by?

Some videos I've seen remind me of some dystopian movie - the robotic and uncompromising warning to vacate the area no matter what your purpose (essentially imposing a curfew of sorts) and the fascist-like march of the riot police and their unwarranted beat-down of an innocent couple. Disgraceful stuff if you ask me.

I don't care how much legalese bullsh1t you (not you Nodin, generally speaking!) throw out as a justification, that kind of action is not the kind of action you expect from a force that is supposed to 'protect and serve'. To 'protect and serve whom?' is the question we should be asking.

Manic Moran

DoireNod wrote: »

Sure, it's not the most brutal of riot-policing, but how does one justify the use of tear-gas and subjection to terror on innocent (if ignorant) college kids and concerned (nosey) passers-by?

Would you prefer more physical means?

If the police have to clear the streets, and just asking doesn't work, what comes next? A strongly-worded letter from the Mayor explaining how angry he is?

NTM

DoireNod

Manic Moran wrote: »

Would you prefer more physical means?

No, obviously.

If the police have to clear the streets, and just asking doesn't work, what comes next? A strongly-worded letter from the Mayor explaining how angry he is?

NTM

Why do the police have to clear the streets in this case? An illegal gathering? If so, what constitutes an illegal gathering?

Do you seriously think beating innocent people up and using tear gas were the only options the cops had in this case?

Here's a clip showing some crowd-control training for the South African police:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVtS8dWog7g

They had previously been criticised for using rubber bullets and heavy-handedness.

I've seen riots where you could maybe justify that kind of force, and these gatherings in Pittsburgh certainly don't compare. It's not a battle.

Manic Moran

Why do the police have to clear the streets in this case?

I have no idea. I'm not about to comment on the videos out of context. I presume the police didn't just decide to go there for the lark due to boredom.

And what sort of innocent idiots get in the way of advancing riot police anyway? "Yes, we're just out for a romantic evening stroll past the protests..."

NTM