As Occupy-loving media continue to express outrage over protesters getting pepper-sprayed by campus police officers at the University of California at Davis last week, a surprising admission by one of the attendees was uncovered in an interview Democracy Now!’s Amy Goodman did Monday.
One of the pepper-sprayed students told Goodman, “We had encircled them [campus police], and they were trying to leave, and they were trying to clear a path. And so, we sat down, linked arms, and said that if they wanted to clear the path, they would have to go through us” (video follows with transcript and commentary):
This was a textbook example of a controlled Use-of-Force against actively resisting protesters that refused lawful commands to disperse.
Please spread this to everyone you know and that can hear you. Don’t let these OWS anarchists get away with their lies.
CURT,
hi, that is a good find, to counter the democrats’lies
those youngster have bad example and they will eventualy join the many felons who come on the POST desperate to get the mark of the devil of their profile, because they cannot find any busyness to
trust them enough to employ them.
So what this boils down to is ….The media IS Biased and the TRUTH NEVER LIES….
The truth is the truth. You can bend it, stomp on it, twist it or lie about it; but in the end there it is, the truth.
spitfirexiiv
yes, and now they are the fools, instead of the victims,
bye
I posted this on the other thread, but it bears repeating here as well. The UC Davis (Biochemistry, Molecular, and Development Biology) has a blog with a more in depth account of the events And this is from some who criticize the pepper spray incident. They, however, tend to hold the chancellor’s feet to the fire for blame.
However the events, as constructed from several eyewitnesses, paint a completely different story than what you see via the viral video that was evidently a perspective from only one of the two circles that entrapped the police. What student anarchists post is only a snippet of the larger picture.
The anarchists like to present the viewpoint that the police, stepping over those who were protesting an arrest and refusing to clear the area, was proof there was no threat. However since the infestants cannot control the radical and violent in their own midst (i.e. the credible threats to the Board of Regents, causing a meeting to be postponed), there is no way for police to know who is in those crowded multiple circles, and how they may react.
And apparently, with the admission above, “intimidation” was the quest of the protestors. That is one of the definitions of “violence” via the UC Davis policy manual (my links in comment #81) that allows use of force or extraordinary measures. Thus why the Chancellor has admitted that “Technically speaking, the police followed protocol, but … protocol is not appropriate all the time.” ???? So protocol is appropriate, except when it isn’t?
In the events of that day, it was very appropriate. Below, the account