THIS is the new face of terror in America

[Playinghardball]

Found in the Occupy Mainstream Media

Comment from one of the facebook posters:
What's funny is if a few of us Marines show up in full dress uniform armed to the hilt at a tea party convention its ok, but if we show up at an occupy movement, all out war would start. Weird huh?

[treestar]

1. We have no idea what is happening in that photo

Just because the girl looks goofy mean there is no way she did anything?

And if her arrest is unjust, she can defend herself from the charges.

[DCKit]

2. Yes, because nobody is EVER unjustly charged in 'Murka...

falsely imprisoned or railroaded by the just-us system.

[randome]

3. No, because EVERYBODY is unjustly charged.

I mean, the picture just SCREAMS it, does it not?

Another thread with zero information and plenty of defeatist attitude.

If you think the police system is ALWAYS unjust, then do something about it, don't just rah-rah someone who posts a random picture from Google.

[Fumesucker]

7. Defeatist would be to ignore what's happening..

Graphics like this get people's attention and makes a visceral point in a way that just some speech, however well documented, mostly doesn't.

[rhett o rick]

11. I think you are out numbered. Good luck. nm

[jtuck004]

18. Just because people are outnumbered doesn't mean they are wrong.

That's Selma in 1965, btw.

[raouldukelives]

21. Amen. nt

[rhett o rick]

30. Sorry, my post was misleading. I support what he said but seems to me that

the pack is loose today.

[jtuck004]

31. I know. We all get worked up.

Though sometimes it seems there are some awfully good reasons

[happerbolic]

33. Never can get enough...

...of 'Invader Zim' Girl!

NYPD Arrests 'Invader Zim Girl' on Brooklyn Bridge: 'How Old is She Officer?'
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x620677

[randome]

13. 'Graphics' like a young girl being escorted away by a police officer?

I must be missing something if I don't feel 'visceral' about that.

Pictures will make a visceral point, granted, but not THIS picture.

And pictures do not change the fact that everyone who wants to believe this is the oncoming Police State need to step up and say what they want to do to stop it.

It's kind of like making corporations behave better because...well, they SHOULD!

[Fumesucker]

14. A national security state is a one way ratchet..

I can't think of an example of such a state that hasn't required significant painful social turmoil to reduce or eliminate, perhaps you know more history than I however.

IMO an ever tightening police state is all but inevitable.

[LiberalLovinLug]

28. You miss the point

You were right in your previous post title even if you were just being factitious, "No, because EVERYBODY is unjustly charged"

Under new "anti-terrorism" laws, every protester is guilty of unlawful assembly if they are deemed to be in an arbitrary "security zone" defined by the police.

Another point is that the image shows the disparity between the MSM news that focuses on only the most odd, or violent participants and uses those images to defend the new draconian laws, and the actual average young protester. It seems there are a few like you in this thread that seem to be strangely paranoid about this young woman. Maybe you too are perplexed that she doesn't fit the established MSM profile?

[treestar]

38. Find a statute that makes your second paragraph true

Large crowds of people can create dangers. Cops are there to minimize that. If there was a stomping you'd be blaming them for not being there.

[LiberalLovinLug]

39. So you never heard of bill H.R. 347?

Even the lone Republican that voted against it says this about it:
"Rep. Justin Amash wrote on his Facebook page. “[H.R. 347] expands current law to make it a crime to enter or remain in an area where an official is visiting even if the person does not know it’s illegal to be in that area and has no reason to suspect it’s illegal.”

Amash, Paul Broun, a Georgia Republican, and Ron Paul were the lone dissenting voices opposed to this bill, which is being called the “First Amendment Rights Eradication Act” designed specifically to counter the Occupy movement and other political groups opposed to the bankster regime in control of the Congress and the presidency. Democrats have characterized opposition to the bill as “a whole lot of kerfuffle over nothing.”

http://www.infowars.com/h-r-347-another-step-in-the-elimination-of-the-first-amendment/

which does seem to conflict with the Bill of Rights:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

The police working with the Secret Service can designate whatever security zone however wide and area around an official event - so as to not embarrass the politicians with being able to even see or hear any protest, and they can round up anyone who enters that zone whether they even know about it or not.

It has nothing to do with the police having a presence. And why would you even bring up "stomping"? Is this a common occurance? That seems more likely to occur under this new draconian law if the police attack and cause a stampede.

but Obama signed it so its just great by you.

[treestar]

40. Did this pass and become a law?

I'd quote the law not info wars. Or the opinion of Justin Amash on his FB page. The statute itself makes its "a crime to ever or remain in an area where an official is visiting even if the person does not know it's illegal to be in that area?" That just may be his exaggerated OTT interpretation. And he is a Republican.

[LiberalLovinLug]

46. Yes it is LAW

"President Obama signed bill H.R. 347 (also known as the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011) into law on March 9th, amid numerous protests from the Occupy movement, as well as other agencies."

http://www.inquisitr.com/206017/president-obama-signs-anti-protest-bill-h-r-347/

Another chip off of civil rights...and even more powers to the police to do the bidding of the elite classes. But hey, Obama signed it so its cool, right?

[treestar]

47. What does it say?

Because the opinion of Republican Congressmen on the subject, or info wars.com, are not conclusions we should adopt as to the true effects of the law.

[treestar]

37. this graphic does not do that

It just shows a goofy looking girl. That doesn't mean she didn't do anything that made the arrest justifiable.

[Octafish]

4. Yeah. Ask Don Siegelman.

I'd ask Richard Scrushy, but he's recovering from his 56 months in the Gulag.

[treestar]

29. Sometimes people are unjustly charged

But that photo doesn't prove a thing about that case.

[Eric J in MN]

17. The cops led protesters onto the Brooklyn Bridge, then kettled and arrested them. NT

NT

[SCantiGOP]

25. In addition to the picture

is the fact that people were showing up armed to the teeth at Tea Party rallies, and yet peaceful protestors (and probably some non-peaceful) in Chicago were beaten and arrested - from all accounts - often for no reason.

[LadyHawkAZ]

35. Would this one be more acceptable as a face of terror?

This one?



This one?



This one?




Just sayin', since we DO know what was happening in those photos.

[treestar]

41. Possibly, though they are not that good for the purpose either

Except the pepper spraying one. The top one doesn't have obvious cops in it. The bottom one could be an auto accident or anything. The two girls could be putting on a show.

Large crowds are going to have occurrences. If there were no cops there, as I've said before, and someone got hurt, I bet you'd be trashing the cops for not being there. Are you really so convinced that because the marchers' motives are good, they will not attract to their crowd a single person with other motives, or someone dumb enough to do something stupid?

The cops are there to protect them - that there are bad cops, as there as bad every things, does not change that.

[Zorra]

44. But, but, you really have no idea what happened in the case of those photos!

(Accompanied by the usual wailing and gnashing of teeth)

Submit. Do not question authority.

[Baitball Blogger]

5. Actually, that photo was circulated in DU.

If you check the archives you will find out that she was not part of the Occupy movement. She was on that bridge working on a photography assignment for her school when she was corralled by the police. She called her mom on her cellphone and they both agreed that the fastest way off the bridge was to give herself up to the police.

[randome]

6. No!!! She is evidence of a police state!

Did you not get the memo???????????????????????????

[Crabby Appleton]

32. KatTheMongoose

http://katthemongoose.deviantart.com/journal/Hey-this-13-year-old-has-a-story-to-tell-261776653

[treestar]

42. Here's the video

"

"


The young women who tried to "save" her caused the struggle.

The NYPD is filming it themselves.

[HappyMe]

10. Huh.

A black female police officer is the face of terror? Geez, I can barely look at that 'brutal' photo.

[GoneOffShore]

12. The one in the black hat with the uniform is definitely the new face of terror

And has been for a long time.

[aikoaiko]

15. At least she appears happy.

[RoccoR5955]

16. What entity of law enforcement..

...do I contact for the people in the funny hats, with the badges on them? They are the REAL terrorist threats!

[jtuck004]

19. Don't you see? Danger! She is carrying a Canon. n/t

[MineralMan]

20. That is the face of civil disobedience.

No arrest; no effect. The young woman in that photo knows that. That's why she's smiling.

[whatchamacallit]

22. Is that reported somewhere?

Otherwise, how could you so confidently assume?

[MineralMan]

24. That photo circulated on DU some time ago, and the circumstances

were described. I don't have a link to those earlier posts.

She was arrested as part of an Occupy protest. That much I remember. As such, she was engaging in civil disobedience, which is the whole point of such protest. Unless there are arrests, there is no impact. Getting arrested is part of the civil disobedience process. Sometimes people get hurt in such protests. That's also part of it, and has even more impact than arrests.

I remember that young woman, showing a proud face while being escorted off in handcuffs. She's a brave person, and I'm sure she knows that her arrest is part of the process of the protest she is making.

Without arrests, there is no measurable civil disobedience. Those who are arrested can rightly take pride in being an important part of the protest.

[whatchamacallit]

26. Oops I totally misread your post

Somehow I thought you were claiming that it wasn't an actual arrest. Silly me.

[MineralMan]

27. Sorry if I wasn't clear.

Yes, there was an arrest. Not a violent one, apparently, thank goodness. I've seen that expression on people's faces before after being arrested at a protest. It reminds me of my 20s, back in the late 60s, really.

[TheKentuckian]

43. That is fine and good but no anger and no pushback and the arrest has no impact on turning things

Folks need to be hot, resentful, and unwilling to allow it to stand. De-escalation is not desirable.

[DetlefK]

23. According to her cap, she's a robot from outer space.

To be clear: an insane robot from outer space.

[Rex]

34. Forget terrorists we have an even BIGGER ENEMY TO WORRY ABOUT!

Space aliens! Yep, I said it...aliens from Planet 9! See that 'innocent' skull cap she has on!?! It is a transmitter! I bet those buttons say things like, 'space born death platforms don't kill people, I do.'

[baldguy]

36. Are you talking about the one on the right, or the one on the left?

[backscatter712]

45. You read my mind!

I was about to call in reporting a terrorist wearing a blue uniform, a badge, and a funny hat! Heavily armed and extremely dangerous!

[Egalitarian Thug]

48. The shiny medallions they wear are one giveaway. n/t