Oath Keepers - Not On My Watch!

[blackchisel97]

Puzzle...

To add another piece of the puzzle, there is a local violent gang which dresses in all black.

I did survive Martial Law, curfew, armed patrols, censorship and monitoring of private mail and communication, intern camps, shooting at unarmed citizens and sending armored police force with army to maintain peace -read "protect government from citizens". I've seen peaceful demonstration of laborers being attacked and brutally dispersed by mentioned forces. I know for fact, that in many situations either police members (from away) were dressed as laborers, provided with "stimulating agents" and sent to merge with crowd. Their role was to create a situation which would justify using force by crowd control. In demonstration of 5 - 20 thousand people from couple factories would be impossible to identify agitators. There was between 50 - 100 used at the time. They attacked police with rocks, smashed windows etc. etc. They had ID's preventing them from being seriously beat up by the riot police. This is an old tactics used all over the world and they always worked. Agitators can be dressed similar, not to be confused and harmed. When you watch video material, try to observe if those extreme elements are getting harsh treatment, or rather peaceful bystanders or protesters. Sometimes the can be identified by their footwear (pay attention to the soles - law enforcement issued gear). Another tactic is hiring local gangs to do the same job. This is actually cheaper (favor for favor). Anything is possible. I'm not saying that this was a case but I've seen enough to make a few people stomach sick for a long time and non believing in any government for the rest of their lives.

V

[future pather]

I'm not saying there weren't planned agitators, I'm not saying that in the past there couldn't have been crooked politicians backing that.

But personally right now, I believe that any such groups are not lead by Obama. If I would finger one guy, it could be Rove looking to the next election.

But here's a point I want to reiterate. There were many many planned and peaceful demonstrations.

Only ONE got violent and that one was the ONLY ONE in which people did not have a permit to demonstrate. It is the one that had most people dressed in all black. NO OTHER demonstration had problems. Other people who wanted to get arrested to prove a point were treated with respect and had smiles on their faces while getting arrested. I saw only evidence of the government working with people who were reasonable and stopping people who weren't.

Here's some pics with some of the other successful demonstration. Only one picture shows the people I am talking about in the background on the left. The big peace march towards the end is Friday, after all the violence. It was a total success.

Photo Slide Show: The Pittsburgh Summit

[future pather]

YouTube - Bush's Brain - Available at IndiePix.net

No Jeb

[Sharyn]

Antiquer - re Australian gun laws

[quote=ANTIQUER;69470]Some of this is old and general knowledge, but some as the Australian info. is recent. Hmmmm?

Gun History ...........


It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by
new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their
own Government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500
million dollars. The first year results are now in:

List of 7 items:

Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent.

Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent.

Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!

In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300
percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the
criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns!

While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in
armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the
past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is
unarmed.

There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the
ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public
safety has decreased, after such monumental effort, and expense was
expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns. The
Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it.

You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians
disseminating this information.

Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes,
gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens

Take note my fellow Americans, before it's too late!

Hi Antiquer,
I was rather puzzled when I read this info regarding Australia as it has been a number of years since the mandatory gun law was passed over here. I am also not aware of any major increases of crimes being committed through the use of guns, so was wondering where this info came from. I don't believe that it is because the crimes go unreported by the media because our media over here are just as keen as elsewhere to report on anyone's misfortune & any armed robberies, murders etc always make the headlines.

This information does not fit what I know is happening regarding gun useage - I live in Melbourne, the capital city of Victoria.

After a search on the web I found the following info which would shows that it was written back in 2001:

Crime Down Under Gun Legislation Has Increased Australia's Crime Rate? - BreakTheChain.org


Date Added: Sept. 27, 2001
Last Updated: Sept. 27, 2001
This chain uses questionable statistics to "prove" that recent gun control legislation in Australia has actually increased crime there. It is presented as a warning to those in the United States and other countries who are pushing gun control like those in Australia.
Subject: ABOUT AUSTRALIA
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 6:05 AM
Subject: Worth repeating
From: Ed Chenel, a police officer in Australia.



"Hi Yanks,
I thought you all would like to see the real figures from Down Under.
It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by a new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by our own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars.



The first year results are now in: Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent, Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent; Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent!) In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. (Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not and criminals still possess their guns!)


While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since the criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed.



There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in "successfully ridding Australian society of guns."

You won't see this data on the American evening news or hear your governor or members of the state Assembly disseminating this information.
The Australian experience proves it. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens.

Take note Americans, before it's too late! "




These seem like very convincing statistics and seem to support the popular view of bureaucrats who care nothing about the real effects their laws have. This chain is popular because people want them to be true.
Jenny Mouzos, Research Analyst for the Australian Institute of Criminology, told BreakTheChain.org in 2001 that the letter is an interesting study in creative interpretation of real statistics:

Please find below a detailed response to each claim made in the email entitled "About Australia".


Claim One:
* Homicides are up 3.2%
* Assaults are up 8.6%
* Armed robberies are up 44%
Response:
These figures compare 1996 with 1997 figures and were correct at that time.
(Data source: Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) Recorded Crime 1997, Table 1.1, p 8).


Claim Two:
Figures over the previous 25 years show a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms (changed drastically in the past 12 months).
Response:
Actual figures from the ABS do show an increase in armed robbery from 1995 (5258) to 1996 (6256) to 1997 (9054) to 1998 (10850), but the proportion of firearms used to commit armed robbery has continued to decline over this period:
1995 - 27.8%
1996 - 25.3%
1997 - 24.1%
1998 - 17.6%
1999 - 15.2%
2000 - 14.0%



Claim Three:
In the state of Victoria homicides with firearms are up 300%
Response:
Victoria recorded 7 firearm-related homicides in 1996, and 19 firearm-related homicides in 1997. That number has now fallen.
1996 - 7
1997 - 19 (171.4% increase from 1996 to 1997)
1998 - 17 (10.5% decrease from 1997 to 1998).
1999 - 14 (17.6% decrease from 1998 to 1999).

Claim Four:
There has been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly
Response:
According to the 1998 ABS Crime and Safety Survey "households with persons aged 55 years and over had a lower risk of break-in victimisation compared with other households" (page 27).
According to the ABS Recorded Crime:
1996 - 1474 victims of assault aged 65 and over
1997 - 1662 victims of assault aged 65 and over (12.8% increase from '96 to '97)
1998 - 1663 victims of assault aged 65 and over (0.06% increase from '97 to '98)
1999 - 1793 victims of assault aged 65 and over (7.8% increase from '98 to '99).
Further information on firearm-related homicide and firearm-related injuries in Australia can be downloaded from the AIC website:
Australian Institute of Criminology - Error
Australian Institute of Criminology - Error
Australian Institute of Criminology - Error

For the most part, the statistics presented in the chain letter and in Ms. Mouzos' rebuttle are insignificant and most of the changes can be attributed to population increase and other factors.



The thing about statistics is that they only show rate of incident - they don't show cause and effect. That interpretation is done by the author based on his own biases and beliefs. Another author might easily have used the same stats to show that the law has been a stunning success.
Frankly, the stats aren't convincing on their own and the author's claim that they are a result of the law is questionable at best. Break this chain.
References: Australian Institute of Criminology



Love, Light & Blessings,
Sharyn

[rickoff]

Good grief!

The big peace march towards the end is Friday, after all the violence.

The video posted by Aaron is also from Friday - Friday evening, at that. Long after nearly all the G-20 conference attendees had left and gone. Why are 1200 police and military personnel readying to use riot control tactics to disperse a crowd of only 300 people who obviously are not rioting? The rowdiest they get is to stand there and chant, "We, the people, have a right to assemble." Do you really think the police felt threatened by that?

And in other videos, like this one ( YouTube - BREAKING NEWS! Riots break out at Pittsburgh University, students gassed and beat ) why did the police show up on the university campus and pelt students with rubber bullets and teargas when the students insisted on their right to assemble? Heck, it was their own turf - the university! The police had no business being there, absent a riot and without being invited. The only thing that could possibly be misconstrued as an act of aggression is when one of the protesters picks up a tear gas can that has been lobbed at the demonstrators and throws it back towards the police (36 seconds into the video). I'd say that was a justifiable and courageous thing to do under the circumstances. Anyone else agree?

The use of pepper spray, rubber bullets, bats, tear gas, and a high frequency sound cannon against college students was deplorable. These kids could be anyone's brother, sister, son, or daughter. They are not a threat to anyone, and only wished to exercise their first ammendment right of assembly. Tactics like these bring back memories of Kent State University students who were shot and killed for protesting. Someone gave the order to load up with live ammo, but no one served any jail time for that hideously demented bloodletting. You're probably too young to remember that, Jessica, but I'm sure there are many of us here who remember it well and will never forget it.

Before closing, I ask everyone reading this - including you, Jessica, - to watch the following 4 minute, 41 second video concerning the Friday night university protest, and then speak your minds as to who you believe were the unruly ones - the students, or the police?
YouTube - G20 Brutality displayed - YOUR GOVERNMENT at work! Support LUKE FUND

Rick

[rickoff]

Reply to Aaron:

Brilliant idea to have [The Oath Keepers'] presence. It would be a political nightmare for the police to disturb retired military - who should wear their uniforms. Can you imagine a row of retired military in uniform being harassed by police or worse yet, assaulted?

Yes, I can imagine that vividly. Media reports would probably say they were a group of mentally ill veterans, or something along those lines. That's why a professional video should be made which interviews the Oath Keepers who are present, to show who they are and why they are there.

And military and non-military should exercise their Open Carry rights where it applies in their own area. In Washington state, a permit for handguns is only required if you want to conceal it. Otherwise, you don't need one if you want to openly carry a gun in a holster walking down the street, going into a restaurant, etc...

Same here in Maine, Aaron, and also in Pennsylvania. Philadelphia is the only city in PA that requires an Open Carry permit for pedestrians.
Here's a handy map where you can click on any state and see their Open Carry rules: OpenCarry.org - A Right Unexercised is a Right Lost!

It's a shame that the Oath Keepers' opportunity was lost in Pittsburgh, especially on Friday - after the police brutality of the previous day. Oath Keepers really do need to show up at events that have a likelihood of police or military bullying. I'd be happy to chip in on bus fare to help get them to wherever the next standoff is likely to take place.

Rick

[ANTIQUER]

Gun History

Hi Sharyn!

Thanks for the info., I was hoping someone from "Down Under" would check it out.
I tend to agree with the comments at the end of the report. However, due to the lack of any comment from the government as to the success of this very costly act, I tend to surmise it was less than a resounding success or the politicians would be crowing loudly in the press.

Also, I assume the law was passed in 1999 or 2000 as the report was in 2001. Yet most of the stats cited in the rebuttal cut off in 1999. Is their any way for you to get the stats from 1999 on so we can see what effect the gun collection might have had long-term? It would be interesting to see regardless of interpretation. I tried the links but they said the site was under re-development. Maybe there are other sources for this info.

I think the rest of the report is factual and makes the point. I am a little surprised they didn't mention the small town in Georgia (in the southern U.S.A) that requires all households to own a gun. They have practically no crime.

Thanks again for the info. and any more you can come up with.

Al

[Aaron]

police bruitality and violating the constitution

YouTube - G20 Brutality displayed - YOUR GOVERNMENT at work! Support LUKE FUND

I didn't see my govt at work, I saw Nazi's in American police uniform breaking the law. And National Guard assisting in this? What a sad, sad, pathetic excuse for Americans.

Jessica, maybe your father can do some pro bono work and help these youngsters out as their rights are clearly violated - at least maybe he can consult with them and get more of the story - it is a sad day, unfortunately again, in America.

Blocking students at both ends of a hallway/staircase and tear gassing them?

They're asking the students to leave but won't let them leave by blocking them in?

One of my best friends here had the police show up at his house trying to get in because he matched a description of someone that robbed some wal greens pharmacy???? What a joke. He wasn't there but his mom, a well-respected elementary school teacher was. They tried to force their way in without a warrant to search the place and she wouldn't let them in. She, unfortunately, went out the door and they beat her and arrested her and threw her in jail and treated her like an animal. For weeks she was so stressed from it.

You know where I went a several weeks back? To her FUNERAL because she died of a stress induced aneurysm - because they were threatening to destroy her career and her life - those murderers have shown more about what America is coming to because of the complacency of Americans.

My friend and his brother is in talks with the ombudsman and I hope they get a fortune from the criminal syndicate aka Spokane police.

[future pather]

Ok it was Friday but I still see the people in black and it was after a day of violence by unpermitted protests in the area of town where the most damage was done.

These dopes are like people who chase a tornado and then complain about their vehicle getting damaged or something.

Why didn't these people get a permit to protest like everyone else?

Why are a lot of them wearing all black plus something over their faces?

I WOULDN'T WANT TO SEE THOSE PEOPLE ANYWHERE, not in the street in front of my house, not at the grocery store.

Let's say a group of them were on the street in front of your house. Legal right? Now let's say they kept trying to get into your house? Would you have the police try to stop them? In many of these vids these people are egging the authority on, pushing boundaries, and then trying to film any reaction.

Their goal is clearly to make the police look bad. Otherwise, again, why couldn't they be like all the successful protesters, getting a permit. The police worked with all those people.

My dad supports the law, which works for the people plenty of times.

I don't believe for a second that they were innocent victims.

They treated the security of my town like it was something for their entertainment. I have no sympathy.

[future pather]

And the school and all the private property around it is not "their turf" either. Although some of them may pay tuition, the school has the right to kick out people who cause damage.

[future pather]

Also look at the comments below the vid like

"because our city was in lockdown, people were causeing trouble that night wether it was or wasnt them who the **** protests at night? whats the point of protesting at night, noone hears you except for the people trying to sleep. they shoulda stayed out of downtown or oakland or the strip wherever they were and ****in sat at home, this isnt becoming nazi this is becoming militant and stop letting these little pussys with there camras take advantage of there freedom of speach"

"thats what you get for protesting you idiot.. what did you think you would be able to stroll around Pittsburgh when its in lockdown mode? me personally i believe they should have whooped you ass, along with those morons hanging **** off the bridge, get a life... and get a hint...your opinion doesn't actually matter"

Please don't think these people with the camera were just innocently hanging around.

[Vortex]

Legal definition of ASSEMBLY

Was there an intention to commit an unlawful act?

Those people were in assembly and were NOT a protest, a rout or a riot.
(G20 Brutality displayed - YOUR GOVERNMENT at work! Support LUKE FUND)
Where there "by permit only" signs?
Where there "do not assemble" signs?
Where there "do not enter" signs?
Where there "enter at your on risk" signs?
Where there "No Trespassing" signs?
You don't need a permit to engage in an activity guaranteed by the constitution.
A permit is to ask permission, permission can be denied .. that is not a guarantee IS IT?

ASSEMBLY. The union of a number of persons in the same place. There are several kinds of assemblies.

2. Political assemblies, or those authorized by the constitution and laws; for example, the general assembly, which includes the senate and house of representatives; the meeting of the electors of the president and vice-president of the United States, may also be called an assembly.

3. Popular assemblies are those where the people meet to deliberate upon their rights; these are guaranteed by the constitution. Const. U. S. Amend. art. 1 Const. of Penn. art. 9, s. 20.

4. Unlawful assemblies. An unlawful assembly is the meeting of three or more persons to do an unlawful act, although they may not carry their purpose into execution. It differs from a riot or rout, (q. v.) because in each of the latter-cases there is some act done besides the simple meeting.

[rickoff]

Ok it was Friday but I still see the people in black...Why are a lot of them wearing all black plus something over their faces? I WOULDN'T WANT TO SEE THOSE PEOPLE ANYWHERE... I have no sympathy.

You needn't have said it, Jessica, we already are well aware that you have no sympathy for those who would assert their Constitutional right of freedom to assemble. Notice how the people who are assembled are simply chanting, "We, the people, have a right to assemble?" A permit is not required to participate in that right. Furthermore, I'm sure that people in the neighborhood who were trying to sleep found the firing of police weapons, police shouting, barking of attack dogs, and use of a high frequency sound cannon far more disruptive to sleep than the citizens' chanting. Indeed, any patriotic people in the neighborhood would have felt gladdened to hear the chanted words, and alarmed at hearing them silenced.

What is with this fixation of yours regarding people who wear black? Do you associate those who wear black as being inherently evil? What if several nuns and clergymen showed up in their usual black attire? And did you fail to notice that all the police thugs were dressed in black? Frankly, about the only people dressed all in black with something over their faces were the police. I didn't see people in the park, or at the university, wearing anything over their faces, but if any of the citizens did have something covering their faces it was no doubt an attempt to protect themselves from the police brutality of using rubber bullets and teargas - not to hide their identity or appear as lawless bandits.

Rick

[future pather]

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

I'm sorry but I would find it alarming to see one person like that around town, and more alarming to see several of them. Especially after groups dressed like that got violent.

(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.)

If I owned a store I would not let somebody in who was dressed like that and had a bandanna over their face. Not only for the safety of employees but also of patrons.

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.

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? Will you be paying for their medical bills to thank them for their fly-in-the-face-of-the-law actions? I mean it's totally your right but for me that's unreasonable to ask.

[rickoff]

Re: OathKeepers website - get involved

Just wanted to point out that the OathKeepers website has a section where you can post a comment. I posted a comment and question there on the 29th, but hadn't seen a reply yet from any of the OathKeepers, so posted again today. I suggested how they would be well advised to draw a line in the sand and make a stand for freedom at the next likely point of confrontation between citizens and police/military personnel. It might help if everyone reading this would post their own comment supporting the ideas put forward to the OathKeepers in my posts. You will find the comment section at the bottom of this web page:
Oath Keepers » Blog Archive » Declaration Of Orders We Will Not Obey