Drudge's Easy Libel of the Military
Earlier today I noted that Drudge's link to the use of LRADs as "acoustic weapons" was over the top, which he would have easily recognized on his own if he had simply applied logic to the very video he linked. Put simply, if an LRAD is being used as a weapon, various people would not be walking or standing directly in front of it.
It's common sense. But Matt Drudge is after headlines and eyeballs, not accuracy, and that is why his inflammatory link that screams SEE U.S. MILITARY SNATCH PROTESTER... is so detestable.


Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 10:55 AM
Comments
Posted by: John at September 25, 2009 11:38 AM (n6ipG)
You are correct about the ID of the "troops" in the video as cops vs. military personnel.
The question is why are we letting leos on the street dress as paramilitary troops. It leads to this type of confusion for the average person.
Posted by: toaster802 at September 25, 2009 11:52 AM (vGjNf)
And why would we have them wearing camo, and wearing it badly? Why would PA State troopers be doing a snatch and grab on this kid? If that's PA cops, there'd better be a damned good reason. And I can't think of one that explains 1) Why they didn't cuff the guy and 2) why they had so much trouble getting the guy into the car.
Posted by: Pablo at September 25, 2009 12:03 PM (yTndK)
Posted by: Just asking at September 25, 2009 12:11 PM (zwiyV)
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at September 25, 2009 12:16 PM (gAi9Z)
Used > mostly < by SF and some uberwannabe SWAT teams. Also in use surprisingly y the Latvian and Estonian Military here in Iraq. More than likely State Police in the 'Bdoos' trying to look hardcore... the lack of any other tactical gear and the placement of the sidearm (damned near impossible to get at in a 'stresstime environ') sez this 'snatch' was planned for a specific target, probably someone with an outstanding warrant. Just my 2 cents.....
Posted by: Big Country at September 25, 2009 12:29 PM (Z8fIq)
Just for grins n giggles: The pattern that the dudes on the right are wearing is Crye Multicam www.cryeprecision.com
Used -mostly- by SF and some uberwannabe SWAT teams. Also in use surprisingly by the Latvian and Estonian Military here in Iraq. More than likely State Police in the 'Bdoos' trying to look hardcore... the lack of any other tactical gear and the placement of the sidearm (damned near impossible to get at in a 'stresstime environ') sez this 'snatch' was planned for a specific target, probably someone with an outstanding warrant. Just my 2 cents.....
Posted by: Big Country at September 25, 2009 12:30 PM (Z8fIq)
It should be noted that part of crowd control is snatching protesters from the crowd. Well done, it is a surgical procedure from which there is no way the target can escape. It should also be noted that BOTH the police AND military practice this technique. I would guess that it's probably police just because they shoved the targets head down to get him into the car. If you've watched the foreign services make a snatch they don't mind banging a struggling target around a little to help things go a little smoother.
I've never personally witnessed a real snatch, but have been volunteered to act as the snatchee in several practice sessions.
It must be kind of a scary thing, one minute all your buds are surrounding you in this one big EVENT, the next you're head down in the back seat of a vehicle under restraint. The more you struggle the more banged around you get. (Which is probably more of a feature than a bug.)
Posted by: Barney at September 25, 2009 12:42 PM (LcPv7)
Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at September 25, 2009 12:47 PM (5aa4z)
Posted by: Picric at September 25, 2009 12:54 PM (oKOn9)
I say real. I worked at a PD department where we were given old cammies of different varieties that are swat teams used for all different things. So it isn't odd to see different uniform styles being worn by pd officers.
Posted by: Alex at September 25, 2009 12:54 PM (DqPEX)
You have two big guys get in the vehicle with him so there isn't to much of a danger of escaping until they can cuff and frisk.
The other thing that makes me think it's real is the gas. Looks like the car leaves through a cloud of tear gas. If the police were firing gas to break up the crowd the street would be closed to civilian traffic. So doubt it was performance art as some have stated in other threads.
Posted by: Waste93 at September 25, 2009 01:05 PM (KHM8y)
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at September 25, 2009 01:06 PM (gAi9Z)
I wonder if the "protester" being "arrested" wasn't undercover... and was in fact simply being extracted because the tear gas cloud was approaching and/or some other police action was about to take place that they didn't want to subject him to... but without blowing his cover.
No proof; just speculation.
Posted by: David at September 25, 2009 01:07 PM (ONWQS)
Posted by: Jay at September 25, 2009 01:07 PM (L8r/r)
BTW...the USAF still wears the woodland BDU but would not have been involved in something like this.
Posted by: jnc1991 at September 25, 2009 01:14 PM (rJsAM)
Has anyone bothered attempting to find out who the guy was being snatched? How about his friends? Wouldn't they be vocal about his status? If that were my buddy I would be calling the police station, his cell phone, his mother!
This is yet another attempt by Alex Jones to generate traffic to his conspiracy ministry....$$$ Good luck, Alex!
Posted by: jnc1991 at September 25, 2009 01:23 PM (rJsAM)
Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at September 25, 2009 01:32 PM (5aa4z)
Posted by: Caleb Howe at September 25, 2009 01:42 PM (VyIhp)
http://www.portauthority.org/PAAC/CompanyInfo/PoliceandSafety/PortAuthorityPolice/tabid/131/Default.aspx (reverse search the phone number on the side of suburbans). They maintain a fleet of unmarked vehicles and my guess is that is who owns the Crown Vic. My conclusions is this was performed by poorly trained (not a single scratch on ANY of their riot gear and brand new equipment) and poorly supervised (stuffing an unrestrained suspect in the back of a vehicle) Port Authority officers or even rented security officers. I believe the photo of the suspect on the ground is after the abduction judging by the tired look of the 'officer' their unkept clothes (bloused trousers) and the suspect in plastic cuffs (a white ziptie, all temporary cuffs I've ever seen were black). I think this is authentic and the Port Authority of Alleghenny COunty has a heck of a lot of explaining to do.
Posted by: Stan Redmond at September 25, 2009 01:51 PM (Lcbav)
Posted by: mwl at September 25, 2009 02:24 PM (DSeW+)
Posted by: Penfold at September 25, 2009 03:06 PM (lF2Kk)
why?
and, perhaps more importantly, why should urban police be wearing camo to demonstrations on city public streets in the first place? perhaps they want the demonstrators to think what Drudge jumped to . . . or perhaps they're idiots who don't understand the PR of demonstrations. chalk another one up for the militarization of the nation's police forces.
Posted by: po at September 25, 2009 03:15 PM (WZ/Yc)
I don't particularly like the idea of the police becoming so militarized, particularly the wearing of bdu's. However, I think the use of military-style faded patches makes absolutely no sense. They are civilian police and should be self-identified as such.
The fact that we have a hard-time identifying who these gentlemen are is telling. I think the car is a big give away, as well as the armed guy in armor on the far left at the very end of the video.
(if you catch me in a really grumpy mood, I let you know what I think of the poor uniform policy that allows some police to wear long-sleeve t-shirts [with the word 'Police'] and jeans. Slobby all the way)
Posted by: ElamBend at September 25, 2009 04:18 PM (UAiWm)
Authorities, Wary of Violent Protests, Beef Up Security in Pittsburgh
Ahead of G-20 Summit
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
By Joshua Rhett Miller
=====
So, there are military units in the area. Two battalions is a lot of firepower...
Plus, even if they are civilian police officers, why are civilian cops wearing military uniforms? (No, in a free nation, there is no rational excuse.)
Posted by: Warren Bonesteel at September 25, 2009 04:51 PM (2idn5)
Do some actual research - facts, evidence, proofs, references and resources - and you'll find that things don't look as rainbowie and warm fuzzy as many of you wish to believe.
All politicians are corrupt power-mad autocrats, except for the ones you like and support? Such corrupt and power-mad men and women would never turn America into a police state, especially the politicians you know and love??
Really?
Why does the objective evidence prove that you're wrong?
Posted by: Warren Bonesteel at September 25, 2009 05:01 PM (2idn5)
Posted by: bemusedinPGH at September 25, 2009 05:17 PM (5iv1T)
Do they have any duty to identify themselves before they stuff the dude in the car? Just wondering.
Posted by: Pinandpuller at September 25, 2009 05:38 PM (aRm4V)
Plus, the guy hasn't been searched and is still wearing his backpack.
What's in his pockets?
What's in the backpack?
Those are important questions to ask because he's got both hands free if he decides to dig out a weapon, etc.
That's not normal is it?
Posted by: Aye Chihuahua at September 25, 2009 05:58 PM (y0/M3)
Posted by: Bob at September 25, 2009 07:29 PM (SLEq7)
2) They'd better be ready to explain this, because the action is looking pretty dang stupid.
Posted by: Foxfier at September 25, 2009 11:58 PM (PVayi)
bdu's fit the bill.
if you have a list of fast objectives to carry out like santching potential worst offenders getting ready to do something really ignorant, or your on the look out for numbnuts with existing warrants you want to look identifiable to your comrades but not stand out so much you look like helmeted padded riot police.
but the fact that they didnt take away his back pack at a minimum is odd to me as well as not zip tying his wrists.
Posted by: rumcrook® at September 26, 2009 12:55 PM (60WiD)
Either way it gives you the creeps with the type of power that The One is trying to weild.
Posted by: David C at September 26, 2009 04:11 PM (FacGW)
In no particular order, some of them are:
Drudge
Andrew Sullivan
The Washington Post
Drudge
Andrew Sullivan
The New York Times
Andrew Sullivan
Drudge
The Huffington Post
Drudge
The Daily KOS
Andrew Sullivan
MSNBC
CBS
ABC
did I mention Drudge? Sullivan?
Posted by: Larry Sheldon at September 26, 2009 07:21 PM (OmeRL)
So they can do their thing in the War On Drugs, the War On Jaywalkers, the War on peaceful people, the War on (fillintheblank).
Not peace officers anymore.
Posted by: Larry Sheldon at September 26, 2009 07:24 PM (OmeRL)
Posted by: mikemcdaniel at September 27, 2009 07:42 PM (orefC)
And, by the way, why was he arrested from among all the rioters, usually the black bloc leads the violence and they wear masks and all black.
Posted by: Federale at September 28, 2009 11:54 AM (ev309)
Processing 0.01, elapsed 0.0197 seconds.
18 queries taking 0.0134 seconds, 45 records returned.
Page size 31 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.