- Messages
- 1,405
- Reactions
- 682
I'll do that and I am confident the media accounts will be truthful too!
JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Dont resist the govt or else
- Thread Starter PDXGuy
- Start date
I'll do that and I am confident the media accounts will be truthful too!
- Messages
- 4,996
- Reactions
- 2,279
No need to take just the medias word for it...even though multiple media sources would be more reputable than a lone individual with an agenda. Just listen to the man himself in some of his speeches. his agenda shines through pretty clearly.
- Messages
- 1,405
- Reactions
- 682
I'm at a disadvantage here, I'm not the great mind reader you are.
- Messages
- 4,996
- Reactions
- 2,279
And you obviously have not done any research or you would realize how ridiculous that statement is.
Would this entire thread be useless if the origional poster just put down somthing like this:
"I found this today on YouTube, what do you guys think?"
(maybe PDX didn't know about this topic has already been posted?)
It seems to be getting out of control and without trying to go on anyone's Wheaties, Playboy was the first to throw a stone here...
I am not taking a side at all, I have seen the video but have not seen any case reports, police interviews, hearing transcripts, news reports, etc... Nor have I done any research on the soap box poet himself!
"I found this today on YouTube, what do you guys think?"
(maybe PDX didn't know about this topic has already been posted?)
It seems to be getting out of control and without trying to go on anyone's Wheaties, Playboy was the first to throw a stone here...
I am not taking a side at all, I have seen the video but have not seen any case reports, police interviews, hearing transcripts, news reports, etc... Nor have I done any research on the soap box poet himself!
I think Playboy Penguin, and others (myself included) have followed this site for a while and, quite frankly, have gotten sick and tired of the same old unresearched, reactionary, propagandist crap that is getting perpetuated. Too much unresearched garbage is being regurgitated without any research.
- Messages
- 1,254
- Reactions
- 187
Wichaka, if you're still following this (would that be more correct, if this is still following YOU?) I've a seriouus question for you.
You said you handled a drug dog for seven years, and thus believe the dog did smell something. OK, fair enough. Some accuse the guy of priming the car, knowing he would be accosted and that a drug dog would be brought out. I see nothing to hint at this... seems this was a random stop, not a permanent one.
BUT, to my serious question: when such a trained DEA dog DOES smell something and "goes off", what sort of behaviour does the dog exhibit? Is it something so subtle that ONLY his handler could notice it, or is it something very distinct and obvious that ANYone in the area could, and would likely, notice? Perhaps not understand, precisely, but notice. Some odd, distinct, or specific behaviour on the part of the animal.
You said you handled a drug dog for seven years, and thus believe the dog did smell something. OK, fair enough. Some accuse the guy of priming the car, knowing he would be accosted and that a drug dog would be brought out. I see nothing to hint at this... seems this was a random stop, not a permanent one.
BUT, to my serious question: when such a trained DEA dog DOES smell something and "goes off", what sort of behaviour does the dog exhibit? Is it something so subtle that ONLY his handler could notice it, or is it something very distinct and obvious that ANYone in the area could, and would likely, notice? Perhaps not understand, precisely, but notice. Some odd, distinct, or specific behaviour on the part of the animal.
I have accompanied a drug sniffing dog team as they inspected some Army barracks. There doesn't have to be a defined signal from the dog. The dog went through one room and spent extra time sniffing a desk. He moved on throughout the room, but came back to sniff the desk two more times. He never gave a "signal" but the MP thought that they had reasonable cause for a search based on the dogs actions.
- Messages
- 1,254
- Reactions
- 187
Poster Guy, that's fine and dandy.... but the testimony in the above incident states the dog simply walked by the car and made NO such moves.. did not return, did not pay any particular attention to anything.... almost as if he was simply walking down the street going someplace else.
Sounds to me like the handler SAID the dog "hit" just to give "probable cause" for escalating the incident. Remember, as well, the BP had had confrontations with this same man before..... he was known to them before this stop. Having been on the receiving end of some rather unpleasant and completely unwarranted harrassment by LEO I don't find it all that unbelieveable that the cops were WAY out of line. Remember the sound recording of the cops screaming, cursing, calling him all manner of nasty things, threatening him..... these are the "professionals", carrying on like Junior High punks high on testosterone? Nahhh... Eye doan teenk so meester.......
Sounds to me like the handler SAID the dog "hit" just to give "probable cause" for escalating the incident. Remember, as well, the BP had had confrontations with this same man before..... he was known to them before this stop. Having been on the receiving end of some rather unpleasant and completely unwarranted harrassment by LEO I don't find it all that unbelieveable that the cops were WAY out of line. Remember the sound recording of the cops screaming, cursing, calling him all manner of nasty things, threatening him..... these are the "professionals", carrying on like Junior High punks high on testosterone? Nahhh... Eye doan teenk so meester.......
Ummm....how would the guy sitting in the car know if the dog hit on anything? I'm pretty sure sitting in car obstructs any view of the dog. And I don't consider this guys word as "testimony." I've watched the video of the event and his "testimony." Ones thing is clear, this guy was out to get a response from the border patrol and he got it.
"I don't find it all that unbelieveable that the cops were WAY out of line." OK, where's the proof that they were out of line? It doesn't matter what you or I think happened, we weren't there. They say that the dog smelled something. That gives them reasonable cause to tell the driver to get out. That a FACT. It's the law. Once the officer tells you this, YOU HAVE TO GET OUT. They gave him every opportunity to cooperate.
Bottom line, the guy was WRONG, and was looking to start trouble. He got exactly what he wanted. He WANTED this confrontation so that he could post the video, show his bruises and denounce the Border Patrol. That was his intent the whole time. You can easily see his motives based on his past history, the video of the event and his reaction.
"I don't find it all that unbelieveable that the cops were WAY out of line." OK, where's the proof that they were out of line? It doesn't matter what you or I think happened, we weren't there. They say that the dog smelled something. That gives them reasonable cause to tell the driver to get out. That a FACT. It's the law. Once the officer tells you this, YOU HAVE TO GET OUT. They gave him every opportunity to cooperate.
Bottom line, the guy was WRONG, and was looking to start trouble. He got exactly what he wanted. He WANTED this confrontation so that he could post the video, show his bruises and denounce the Border Patrol. That was his intent the whole time. You can easily see his motives based on his past history, the video of the event and his reaction.
- Messages
- 1,254
- Reactions
- 187
Cars have mirrors, windows, that sort of thing. The man in the car claims to have watched the dog the entire time he was near the car, and never saw ANYTHING that he thought could have been a response to training. He asked for a second dog, or a return of the first, both to the original handlers and to the "upgrade" officers who came on the scene to bust him out of the car. Denied. ALL we have is the word of one of the screaming, insulting, threatening, potty-mouthed dog handlers that the dog "smelled something". The cops KNOW the "magic words" are no longer "open sesame", but "the dog hit". Whether the dog did or not, saying those words instantly gives probable cause. You're wanting proof, where's the proof the dog DID hit, rather than his handler merely SAYING he did? Nowhere. WHY the refusal to "redo" the dog test?
Cops never lie, they are always polite, courteous, never have a personal agenda, never abuse anyone, are always models of propriety and consideration. And I've a great deal on a bridge back in Manhattan..... think Rodney King, the unarmed man shot at a bus station in Portland in broad daylight, Kent State, Ruby Ridge, Waco Texas, and I've got a couple personal experiences, enough to tell me there is at least SOME modicum of foundation in truth to the above mentioned incidents.
Congress can pass a law that gives unrestricted powers to the Border Patrol within a hundred miles of the border... but that does NOT negate the constitutional protections we have. That border zone is clearly unconstitutional, and unenforceable. This man knew it. From the beginning, the tone of the cops was belligerent and nasty. Their language, taken on its own and in the mouth of a private citizen would be grounds for charges. But THEY are cops, therefore exempt. There WERE no grounds for a search of the vehicle early on, it was his refusal to comply that prompted them to bring the dog round for a sniff, to "establish probable cause" to "justify" their further aggression.
Nor did they need to bust out his window... any cabbie or towtruck driver has slim jims and can open any car door (especially an old Chevy like he had) in about two seconds. Cops ahve them too, to open and search suspicions abandoned vehicles, and those involved in crashes. And, once opened, why did they need to taze repeatedly, mace, stomp, smash his face into the glass shards...... any soldier in Iraq treating a detained terrorist insurgent this way would be court martialled, and the press would have a field day with it. "See how nasty we are to those sweet, harmless Syrians "visitors" over there?"
Those cops WANTED to get tough, to prove who is boss, to get one on this guy.. their "old friend" who'd stood up to them before. And they know, and play, the "rules" to their advantage. Never mind the law...... we have here another incident to add to the pile of Rodnay Kings. What will it take for this sort of abuse to cease? More than their supervisors being on board with their games, I can assure you. Or a court slapping someone's hand once every ten years or so.
Cops never lie, they are always polite, courteous, never have a personal agenda, never abuse anyone, are always models of propriety and consideration. And I've a great deal on a bridge back in Manhattan..... think Rodney King, the unarmed man shot at a bus station in Portland in broad daylight, Kent State, Ruby Ridge, Waco Texas, and I've got a couple personal experiences, enough to tell me there is at least SOME modicum of foundation in truth to the above mentioned incidents.
Congress can pass a law that gives unrestricted powers to the Border Patrol within a hundred miles of the border... but that does NOT negate the constitutional protections we have. That border zone is clearly unconstitutional, and unenforceable. This man knew it. From the beginning, the tone of the cops was belligerent and nasty. Their language, taken on its own and in the mouth of a private citizen would be grounds for charges. But THEY are cops, therefore exempt. There WERE no grounds for a search of the vehicle early on, it was his refusal to comply that prompted them to bring the dog round for a sniff, to "establish probable cause" to "justify" their further aggression.
Nor did they need to bust out his window... any cabbie or towtruck driver has slim jims and can open any car door (especially an old Chevy like he had) in about two seconds. Cops ahve them too, to open and search suspicions abandoned vehicles, and those involved in crashes. And, once opened, why did they need to taze repeatedly, mace, stomp, smash his face into the glass shards...... any soldier in Iraq treating a detained terrorist insurgent this way would be court martialled, and the press would have a field day with it. "See how nasty we are to those sweet, harmless Syrians "visitors" over there?"
Those cops WANTED to get tough, to prove who is boss, to get one on this guy.. their "old friend" who'd stood up to them before. And they know, and play, the "rules" to their advantage. Never mind the law...... we have here another incident to add to the pile of Rodnay Kings. What will it take for this sort of abuse to cease? More than their supervisors being on board with their games, I can assure you. Or a court slapping someone's hand once every ten years or so.
- Messages
- 4,996
- Reactions
- 2,279
That very statement ruins his credibility since it is completely implausible and unsupportable. There is no possible way you can see every angle and vantage on a car while sitting in the drivers seat. It just can't be done. You cannot see below the hood line in front of you, anything on the passenger side forward of the front mirror, nor the rear side of the car.
"WHY the refusal to "redo" the dog test?"
Easy, it's called bad precedent. Anyone who has worked in a union enviroment knows what I'm talking about.
"Cops never lie, they are always polite, courteous, never have a personal agenda, never abuse anyone, are always models of propriety and consideration. "
OH, and this person DOESN'T HAVE AN AGENDA?!?!?
"Congress can pass a law that gives unrestricted powers to the Border Patrol within a hundred miles of the border... but that does NOT negate the constitutional protections we have. That border zone is clearly unconstitutional, and unenforceable". .....blahblahblah...rise up....blahblahblah...type some crappy call to arms....blahblahblah....hide behind a keyboard....blahblahblah.....
"Nor did they need to bust out his window... any cabbie or towtruck driver has slim jims and can open any car door (especially an old Chevy like he had) in about two seconds."
So you're volunteering your tax dollars to pay for this? You'd probably be the first to get your undies in an uproar because your hard earned money is being spent on the oppression of these cop hating saints!
"Cops ahve them too, to open and search suspicions abandoned vehicles, and those involved in crashes."
No, most are not trained and equiped to do this.
"And, once opened, why did they need to taze repeatedly, mace, stomp, smash his face into the glass shards......
any soldier in Iraq treating a detained terrorist insurgent this way would be court martialled, and the press would have a field day with it. "
How flippin dare you pull the "any soldier in Iraq" card. I've been there. I've faced REAL threats and have dealt with REAL corruption. I've dealt with REAL police officers with REAL motives to kill REAL people. There is no relation, or comparison to this situation. If you feel otherwise, feel free to enlist and spend a free vacation (tax free!) in a war zone.
Nathan
Hyperbole, hyperbole, hyperbole....
Easy, it's called bad precedent. Anyone who has worked in a union enviroment knows what I'm talking about.
"Cops never lie, they are always polite, courteous, never have a personal agenda, never abuse anyone, are always models of propriety and consideration. "
OH, and this person DOESN'T HAVE AN AGENDA?!?!?
"Congress can pass a law that gives unrestricted powers to the Border Patrol within a hundred miles of the border... but that does NOT negate the constitutional protections we have. That border zone is clearly unconstitutional, and unenforceable". .....blahblahblah...rise up....blahblahblah...type some crappy call to arms....blahblahblah....hide behind a keyboard....blahblahblah.....
"Nor did they need to bust out his window... any cabbie or towtruck driver has slim jims and can open any car door (especially an old Chevy like he had) in about two seconds."
So you're volunteering your tax dollars to pay for this? You'd probably be the first to get your undies in an uproar because your hard earned money is being spent on the oppression of these cop hating saints!
"Cops ahve them too, to open and search suspicions abandoned vehicles, and those involved in crashes."
No, most are not trained and equiped to do this.
"And, once opened, why did they need to taze repeatedly, mace, stomp, smash his face into the glass shards......
any soldier in Iraq treating a detained terrorist insurgent this way would be court martialled, and the press would have a field day with it. "
How flippin dare you pull the "any soldier in Iraq" card. I've been there. I've faced REAL threats and have dealt with REAL corruption. I've dealt with REAL police officers with REAL motives to kill REAL people. There is no relation, or comparison to this situation. If you feel otherwise, feel free to enlist and spend a free vacation (tax free!) in a war zone.
Nathan
Hyperbole, hyperbole, hyperbole....
Upcoming Events
New Classified Ads
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2000 Harley Davidson Sportster 1200 great runner!!- Started by OregonSig
- Replies: 0