Oath Keepers - Not On My Watch!

[Aaron]

http://oathkeepers.org/oath/

Thanks for that link Rick. I didn't even see the main website, I posted the blog.

Here is the Oath Keeper's homepage:

[rickoff]

Those people look like they are about to rob a bank.

Which people? The ones in the park who are totally surrounded by police, and forced to lay face down on the ground, after which tear gas is sprayed on them?

(You seem to have missed my point about the local gang that dresses in black if you have to ask what I have against that.)

I looked at all of the pictures in the "slide show" that you referenced in post #17, where you said that the people in black were in the background at left of one picture. I only saw one photo that could possibly be what you are talking about:

When I'm out and about these days I am hoping and praying I don't see somebody like that and glad when I see police, security guards, etc. who are only still here bc them bandanna people got violent.

Is the above photo the one you were referring to? I do see two people dressed partially in black at the left, but it can not be seen if they are wearing any sort of face coverings. They certainly don't appear to be getting very rowdy, and are just standing there. Are you sure that these are violent gang members? Notice that the two people in the foreground are both wearing black shoes, and that the girl is wearing black leggings and a black polka dotted skirt. Perhaps these are gang members too, right? I'm sure that you probably do have gang members there in Pittsburgh who roam the steets looking to cause trouble, and maybe there's a good chance that they were the ones responsible for damages caused. But in any case, what in the world does that have to do with police brutality against non violent college students? If there's a small group of gang members doing damage then round them up and cart them off to jail, but leave everyone else alone.

Now everyone take one more look at the "people in black" in the photo above, and then take a look at the photo below. Which group of "people in black" looks more menacing to you? Comments, people?

Do you have sympathy for someone who goes swimming at a beach when it is closed due to shark attacks in order to assert their civil rights?

Shark attack, police attack - not much difference. And in the video at the park ( YouTube - G20 Brutality displayed - YOUR GOVERNMENT at work! Support LUKE FUND ) I saw no signs saying the park was closed. So in this case, yes I do have sympathy for those who were unjustly attacked by shark-like, merciless, stormtrooper police.

Rick

[rickoff]

Interesting developments

An article appearing in the October 1 Pittsburgh Tribune-Review identifies a 21 year old California man, David Japenga, as the person responsible for much of the window smashing damage during the G-20 summit.
California man to stand trial for vandalism in Oakland during G-20 - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

Interestingly, the article states, "During Japenga's hearing, state police Trooper Boyd Wass testified he was working undercover and watching a crowd of 100 protesters Thursday evening in Oakland when he saw Japenga break away and start smashing windows of businesses with a U-shaped bike lock. Citizen's Bank, Quizno's and the Irish Design Center estimated damage to their windows cost a combined $15,440."

A couple of questions arise. After Wass witnessed Japenga smashing the very first window, why did he not act quickly to subdue and arrest him before allowing further damage to occur? And since Japenga clearly left the small crowd of protesters before beginning his rampage, why wasn't he singled out for corrective action, rather than branding the entire group as trouble makers?

In total, nearly 200 people were arrested and charged by Pittsburgh police in connection with Thursday and Friday incidents last week. More than 50 people have already filed charges of police abuse and brutality. A judge has already dropped charges against several university students, and has offered to drop charges against anyone else showing video or other proof that they were unjustly arrested.

[rickoff]

Another must see

Take a good look at this intimidating display of force by Pittsburgh nazi storm troopers as they beat their batons in unison while advancing against a non-violent group of citizens attempting to assert their First Ammendment right to peacefully assemble.

YouTube - WeAreChange Confronts Tyranny

[future pather]

A couple of questions arise. After Wass witnessed Japenga smashing the very first window, why did he not act quickly to subdue and arrest him before allowing further damage to occur?

Uh gee could it have been perhaps bc the officer was. . . .UNDERCOVER?!? And in the middle of an important assignment protecting people and property from violence Hmmmm. Let's think about that Rick.

And since Japenga clearly left the small crowd of protesters before beginning his rampage, why wasn't he singled out for corrective action, rather than branding the entire group as trouble makers?

As far as I know he is still in jail here. Bail was in the double digit thousands and they thought he may not pay it before his trial.

In total, nearly 200 people were arrested and charged by Pittsburgh police in connection with Thursday and Friday incidents last week. More than 50 people have already filed charges of police abuse and brutality. A judge has already dropped charges against several university students, and has offered to drop charges against anyone else showing video or other proof that they were unjustly arrested.

While the others, as you have stated are getting justice. Protection from violence in the middle of it all seems like the right priority to me.

[rickoff]

Reply to Jessica:

Uh gee could it have been perhaps bc the officer was. . . .UNDERCOVER?!? And in the middle of an important assignment protecting people and property from violence Hmmmm. Let's think about that Rick.

I have thought about it, and that's why I asked the question. If his assignment is to protect people and property from violence then he should have acted quickly to do just that. Since he obviously didn't, then what could his actual assignment have been? To simply pose as one of the citizens taking part in the otherwise peaceful protest? Or perhaps to locate those in a crowd who appear to be angry, and then incite them to violence to provide an excuse for ending the demonstration? When seeing that an act of violence is inevitable and about to occur, or is already occurring, an undercover officer is obliged to take prompt remedial action, whether it exposes his undercover operation or not.

Protection from violence in the middle of it all seems like the right priority to me.

I agree, and simply subduing and removing the few culprits responsible for actual violence would certainly have been appropriate and justified. But surrounding groups of peaceful protesters, forcing them to the ground, beating them with clubs, pelting them with rubber bullets, spraying them with mace and teargas, projecting ear splitting bursts from sound cannons, is certainly not appropriate or justified (unless, of course, the ones doing so, or the ones who approve of such repugnant action, are totally demented).

Incidentally, the person charged as the perpetrator who is responsible for most of the property damages may have a good case for escaping punishment. His lawyer has presented the argument that the undercover policeman, Wass, could not possibly have identified his client as the actual perpetrator of the events, because he was wearing clothing and a face covering that obscured his identity. The argument, of course, would be that since other people that day were similarly dressed, it could have been any one of them that officer Wass saw breaking windows. By not taking prompt action against the individual responsible, Wass may have allowed him to mix back in with other similarly dressed people after doing the damage, which would make it nearly impossible to then single him out as being the actual culprit unless definitive video proof can be offered to substantiate charges. I have not seen any such videos so far, and there is a good chance that such video does not exist, since several professional video crews (including CNN, for example) were sprayed with teargas and forced to leave areas where demonstrations were taking place. Please do keep us informed as to the outcome of the trial against this person, Jessica. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Rick

[Mad Scientist]

Please do keep us informed as to the outcome of the trial against this person, Jessica. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Rick

Yes please do. If this fellow is somehow declared innocent due to lack of evidence or whatever I would find that every interesting. As I would then assume that the whole thing was a staged event used to break up the demonstration.

[rickoff]

Exactly. Ditto that, MS.

Rick

[future pather]

I have thought about it, and that's why I asked the question. If his assignment is to protect people and property from violence then he should have acted quickly to do just that.

I have never worked as an undercover law officer but it only seems logical that he would not blow his cover when the day was far from over.

It makes sense that he would somehow identify the violent person/people so that known officers could act and he could retain his cover and continue to do his job.

[future pather]

Ok so something changed or I misread something.

I'm just posting this to correct my past post and bc people are asking.

The guy from CA is being held on felony charges without bail according to a local article I just read.

[future pather]

Ok further update. I don't know the order of things here but apparently he was at some point given a bail option of $15k and it was raised and now he is under house arrest with electronic monitoring.

"He will be arraigned in December and the trial will probably be in March or April."

[ANTIQUER]

A broader overview.

This incident has raised some interesting points, most of which are the same points that have been heavily discussed for many years involving many demonstrations. Little has changed.

My questions are these;

(1) Why demonstrate? It only gives the press fodder, most of which is biased against the demonstrators in order to denigrate their cause and gives the "men in black" an opportunity for whatever. Members of Congress write it off as a few nuts on the loose, etc. Writing, e-mailing, attending their local meetings, etc. are much more effective at getting their attention without the negative fallout. And of course voting is the only real control we have over them.

(2) Why do we have to shut down a major U.S. city just because "the rich guys are coming to town."? If they are in that much danger meet on an island somewhere where they can be more easily protected without disrupting the lives of so many citizens. There are several in the Caribbean with luxury hotels that would be glad to see them. After all, this is nothing but a big show for the press. Can anyone name anything of lasting value that ever came from one of these meetings? They are as worthless as the U.N.

Those are my thoughts, comments welcome.

Al

[rickoff]

Hi Al,

I fully agree with your second point, and it is a good one. Regarding your first point, however, I beg to differ. I think that the blinders have been taken off of a great many peoples' eyes because of the protest activities and resultant police brutality seen in Pittsburgh, and I believe that's a good thing. Sure, there will be those who liken the protesters to a bunch of nuts, but I believe the majority of people who review the video evidence are seeing past that. I also feel that, as you say, voting would be the only real control we have over abuses ignored or promoted by elected officials. The problem is, though, that in practically all cases we are not really given a choice when we vote. Whatever person we end up voting for, nothing really changes. And that is because the powerful elite are in full control of the "choices" that are presented to us. Unless and until a vast majority of the population awakens to this fact, and takes action to stop and prevent it, such abuse is perpetually inevitable.

Best regards to you,

Rick

[Vortex]

GENERAL ORDERS No. 100. (1863 )

Would this explain rulings coming from the courts?

As far as I know there is no evidence that a "special proclamation"
or "treaty of peace" has occurred, which means the United States
is still under martial law.
If indeed the US is under martial law and the Lieber Code of 1863 is still
active, this is a major KEY to understanding who you are and what
has and is happening.

Worth reading to know the rules of martial law.

Worth noting is evidence that local police are extensions of
the military authority.

The Lieber Code of 1863

Title: INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF ARMIES OF THE UNITED STATES IN THE FIELD.
SECTION I.--Martial law--Military jurisdiction--Military necessity--Retaliation.
SECTION II.--Public and private property of the enemy--Protection of persons, and especially of women; of religion, the arts and sciences--Punishment of crimes against the inhabitants of hostile countries.
SECTION III.--Deserters--Prisoners of war--Hostages--Booty on the battle-field.
SECTION IV.--Partisans--Armed enemies not belonging to the hostile army--Scouts--Armed prowlers-- War-rebels.
SECTION V.--Safe-conduct--Spies-- War-traitors-- Captured messengers-Abuse of the flag of truce.
SECTION VI.--Exchange of prisoners--Flags of truce--Flags of protection.
SECTION VII.--The parole.
SECTION VIII.--Armistice--Capitulation.
SECTION IX.--Assassination.
SECTION X.--Insurrection-- Civil war--Rebellion.

This isn't a totally bad thing if it is still active!
It explains to us where we stand and the big dirty secret the authorities
have been keeping from us because the Lieber Code states the public
never has to be informed they are under martial law.

Is this the road-map to what is going on?

Worth noting: The authorities must protect those that are peaceful
inhabitants else suffer punishments that include death.

Randy

[ANTIQUER]

Demonstrations

Hi rick, always glad to hear a response or read a post from you.

You do such a thorough job of investigating whatever the subject and supporting your incisive statements with the evidence you find. That's why you reached your conclusions as to the value of demonstrations.

Unfortunately most people are not like that. Take this particular event. What we saw here on the news was the guy smashing windows over and over, police "controlling" (as the media put it) unruly demonstrators and defending themselves and others from the more violent ones with nightsticks, dogs, and tear gas, including those students. That is it for most people, it is only a relative handful that investigate further and most of them are powerless to do anything corrective, even if they cared enough to try.

This thread pretty much makes my point. The Forum has approx. 66,000 members. This thread has had only 525 views, and only 46 replies, most of them you or Jessica or Aaron. Of the rest how many looked at all the video evidence, etc. that was presented? Whatever the number, only a few even commented on it.

Further, what did the demonstrators here accomplish? Nothing, as far as I can tell. I'm pretty sure the members of the G-20 already knew lots of people were unhappy with them and their positions on various topics, and this group had no more influence on them than any other as far as I could discern.

As to the police brutality, that is a local issue that the people of Pittsburgh could take action on, but I have heard no hue and cry to do it, even though the local issues are where the voters have the most control. That is where we must start weeding out the bull-filled choices the elite present , elect good people to office and help them work their way up through the ranks of their respective parties until they are in office in Washington,D.C. It will not happen overnight, but it is the only way. In the meantime, don't re-elect any one but those candidates.

I fully support the aims and efforts of those who want to protest against injustice etc., I just think they are going about it in the wrong fashion. It gives the media, the "men in black", or whoever a chance to twist and misrepresent what they are trying to do by whatever means they wish to employ. Many times they hurt their cause more than help it and in the end change nothing.

I agree that we must awaken at least enough of the public to carry through a plan as I have laid out if anything is to change. Those who care enough to demonstrate would surely make a good core to start with if they had good leaders to organize and lead them properly. I, for one, fully intend to do this here in the next election cycle as we finally have a candidate from outside the current political "clique" who is worth supporting.

"Go thou and do likewise".

Best wishes, Al